https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Bug ID: 2088649 Summary: Review Request: pybind11-json - Using nlohmann::json with pybind11 Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: logans@cottsay.net QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/pybind11-json/pybind11-json.spec SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/pybind11-json/pybind11-json-0.2.12-1.fc37.s...
Description: pybind11_json is an nlohmann::json to pybind11 bridge, it allows you to automatically convert nlohmann::json to py::object and the other way around. Simply include the header, and the automatic conversion will be enabled.
Fedora Account System Username: cottsay Target branches: rawhide f36 f35 epel9 epel8 Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=87264920
Relevant Fedora guidelines: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_packaging_header...
Thanks!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Scott K Logan logans@cottsay.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1225692
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1225692 [Bug 1225692] Tracker for Fedora Robotics SIG
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
lichaoran pkwarcraft@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jkadlcik@redhat.com, | |pkwarcraft@gmail.com
--- Comment #1 from lichaoran pkwarcraft@gmail.com --- Hi Soctt, i'd like to try to review this ticket as im still trying to become a packager, @Jakub Kadlčík is my sponsor :)
Version: 0.2.12
A newer version 0.2.13 is released, any reason to keep using this version? see: https://github.com/pybind/pybind11_json/releases/tag/0.2.13
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #2 from lichaoran pkwarcraft@gmail.com --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD 3-Clause License", "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /root/build_upstream/2088649-pybind11-json/licensecheck.txt [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [?]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [?]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [?]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [?]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package does not use a name that already exists. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [x]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. there is a newer version 0.2.13 [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [!]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.
===== EXTRA items =====
Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: pybind11-json-devel-0.2.12-1.fc39.noarch.rpm pybind11-json-0.2.12-1.fc39.src.rpm ========================================================================================================== rpmlint session starts ==========================================================================================================rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 1
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/pybind/pybind11_json/archive/0.2.12/pybind11-json-0.2.12.... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : a9e308d4cf3de16d192cd0baf641bfe17a3a3046e8652e6724204afa3e736db7 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : a9e308d4cf3de16d192cd0baf641bfe17a3a3046e8652e6724204afa3e736db7
Requires -------- pybind11-json-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): cmake-filesystem json-devel pybind11-devel
Provides -------- pybind11-json-devel: cmake(pybind11_json) pybind11-json-devel pybind11-json-static
Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2088649 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, C/C++, Generic Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Java, R, PHP, Python, Haskell, Perl, Ocaml, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Scott K Logan logans@cottsay.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(logans@cottsay.ne | |t) | Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: Package Review
Scott K Logan logans@cottsay.net has canceled Package Review package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org's request for Scott K Logan logans@cottsay.net's needinfo: Bug 2088649: Review Request: pybind11-json - Using nlohmann::json with pybind11 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com --- Hello Scottt, I am sorry, I missed the ticket.
Version: 0.2.12
As lichaoran said, there is already 0.2.13 available. I am not going to block the ticket (any longer) because of this but please don't forget to update after importing the package to DistGit
# Pulled directly from upstream Patch0: %{name}-0.2.12-add-missing-interpreter-guards.patch
Can you please link the upstream PR from which this is taken?
+1 though
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jkadlcik@redhat.com Flags| |fedora-review? Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #5 from Scott K Logan logans@cottsay.net --- Thanks Jakub.
# Pulled directly from upstream Patch0: %{name}-0.2.12-add-missing-interpreter-guards.patch
Can you please link the upstream PR from which this is taken?
This was merged as part of 0.2.13 and is no longer needed. I'll remember to add a reference to the upstream change next time I encounter this situation.
For completeness, here's what I'll by importing:
Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/pybind11-json/pybind11-json.spec SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/pybind11-json/pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.fc41.s... Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=114575903
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pybind11-json
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.fc39) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.fc39) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-f685f1110f (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.el8) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-f685f1110f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-944856881b (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-944856881b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-944856881b has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-944856881b *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-944856881b
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-0f6688c4b9 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-0f6688c4b9
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-f685f1110f has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-f685f1110f
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Last Closed| |2024-03-15 00:38:40
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-0f6688c4b9 (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.el9) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-f685f1110f (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.el8) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-613c7dfa2d (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.fc39) has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088649
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2024-944856881b (pybind11-json-0.2.13-1.fc40) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com