[Bug 1881285] New: Review Request: python-nocasedict - A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Bug ID: 1881285 Summary: Review Request: python-nocasedict - A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: andreas.r.maier@gmx.de QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pywbem/nocasedict/andy/fedora-packaging/pa... SRPM URL: https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict/blob/andy/fedora-packaging/packaging/fe... Description: A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python Fedora Account System Username: andymaier
This is my first package (along with python-nocaselist) and I am seeking a sponsor.
I am also the upstream maintainer of the Python package at https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict.
This package is a dependency of the latest version of the existing 'pywbem' package on Fedora, but it is generally useable and useful.
Latest RPM builds: Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51995594 COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/andymaier/python-nocasedict/build/16...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Andreas Maier andreas.r.maier@gmx.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment|0 |updated
--- Comment #0 has been edited ---
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pywbem/nocasedict/andy/fedora-packaging/pa... SRPM URL: https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict/blob/andy/fedora-packaging/packaging/fe... Description: A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python Fedora Account System Username: andymaier
This is my first package (along with python-nocaselist) and I am seeking a sponsor.
I am also the upstream maintainer of the Python package at https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict.
This package is a dependency of the latest version of the existing 'pywbem' package on Fedora, but it is generally useable and useful.
Latest RPM builds: Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51995594 COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/andymaier/python-nocasedict/build/16...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Andreas Maier andreas.r.maier@gmx.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment|0 |updated
--- Comment #0 has been edited ---
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pywbem/nocasedict/andy/fedora-packaging/pa... SRPM URL: https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict/blob/andy/fedora-packaging/packaging/fe... Description: A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python Fedora Account System Username: andymaier
This is my first package (along with python-nocaselist) and I am seeking a sponsor.
I am also the upstream maintainer of the Python package at https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict.
This package is a dependency of the latest version of the existing 'pywbem' package on Fedora, but it is generally useable and useful.
Latest RPM builds: Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51996872 COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/1680645
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Andreas Maier andreas.r.maier@gmx.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment|0 |updated
--- Comment #0 has been edited ---
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pywbem/nocasedict/andy/fedora-packaging/pa... SRPM URL: https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict/blob/andy/fedora-packaging/packaging/fe... Description: A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python Fedora Account System Username: andymaier
This is my first package (along with python-nocaselist) and I am seeking a sponsor.
I am also the upstream maintainer of the Python package at https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict.
This package is a dependency of the latest version of the existing 'pywbem' package on Fedora. This package has 100% test coverage, and is a generally useful tool for environments that use case insensitive strings.
Latest RPM builds: Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51996872 COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/1680645
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Andreas Maier andreas.r.maier@gmx.de changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment|0 |updated
--- Comment #0 has been edited ---
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pywbem/nocasedict/andy/fedora-packaging/pa... SRPM URL: https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict/blob/andy/fedora-packaging/packaging/fe... Description: A case-insensitive ordered dictionary for Python Fedora Account System Username: andymaier
This is my first package (along with python-nocaselist) and I am seeking a sponsor.
I am also the upstream maintainer of the Python package at https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict.
This package has 100% test coverage, and is a generally useful tool for environments that use case insensitive strings.
This package is a dependency of the latest version of the existing 'pywbem' package on Fedora, and is therefore required in order to be able to upgrade the 'pywbem' package to its latest upstream version.
Latest RPM builds: Koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=51996872 COPR: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/1680645
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Fabian Affolter mail@fabian-affolter.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mail@fabian-affolter.ch Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
--- Comment #1 from Fabian Affolter mail@fabian-affolter.ch --- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pywbem/nocasedict/andy/fedora-packaging/pa... returns a 404 error.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Fabian Affolter mail@fabian-affolter.ch changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |zebob.m@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |zebob.m@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 zebob.m@gmail.com --- - No need to repeat the BuildRequires en the subpackage:
BuildRequires: python3-devel BuildRequires: python3dist(setuptools) # Test deps BuildRequires: python3dist(pytest)
- This should be picked by the automatic deps generator:
Requires: python3dist(six)
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
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: "Unknown or generated", "GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1 GNU Library General Public License v2 or later", "*No copyright* GNU Lesser General Public License, Version 2.1", "*No copyright* GNU Library General Public License v2 or later", "GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1 or later [obsolete FSF postal address (Mass Ave)]". 21 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bob/packaging/review/python- nocasedict/review-python-nocasedict/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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 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 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
Python: [x]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [x]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep
===== SHOULD items =====
Generic: [-]: 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). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-nocasedict-1.0.0-1.fc34.noarch.rpm python-nocasedict-1.0.0-1.fc34.src.rpm python3-nocasedict.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iter -> tier, tire, inter python-nocasedict.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US iter -> tier, tire, inter 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Maier andreas.r.maier@gmx.de --- Sorry for the delay.
I updated the spec file in the upstream repo from the review comments as follows:
* On "No need to repeat the BuildRequires en the subpackage": Removed the first section of them, following the example at https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_example_p....
Additional changes in spec file:
* Bumped version to 1.0.2, the currently released version
* Changed Source to Source0
* Used "python%{python3_pkgversion}-" instead of "python3-". I found that in several upstream packages, e.g. https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-isort/blob/rawhide/f/python-isort....
The resulting spec file has been updated on the master branch of the upstream repo at: https://github.com/pywbem/nocasedict/blob/master/packaging/fedora/python-noc...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 zebob.m@gmail.com --- The package is approved but you still need to find a sponsor, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 zebob.m@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |
--- Comment #5 from Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 zebob.m@gmail.com --- Sponsored.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Ali Erdinc Koroglu ali.erdinc.koroglu@intel.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ali.erdinc.koroglu@intel.co | |m
--- Comment #6 from Ali Erdinc Koroglu ali.erdinc.koroglu@intel.com --- Hello Andreas, Are you gonna complete the reviewing procedures soon? because I need this package.
python3dist(nocasedict) >= 1.0.1 is needed by pywbem-1.4.1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1881285
Ali Erdinc Koroglu ali.erdinc.koroglu@intel.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |1893514
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1893514 [Bug 1893514] pywbem-1.4.1 is available
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com