https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Bug ID: 2323710 Summary: Review Request: python-cloup - CLOUP extends Click with options Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: smooge@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/smooge/AI_tools/fedora-40... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/smooge/AI_tools/fedora-40... Description: Library to build command line interfaces based on Click. It extends click with: option groups, constraints (e.g. mutually exclusive params), command aliases, help themes, "did you mean ...?" suggestions and more.
Fedora Account System Username: smooge
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Stephen John Smoogen smooge@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2317585
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2317585 [Bug 2317585] Review Request: ramalama - RamaLama is a command line tool for working with AI LLM models.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #1 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8209836 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #2 from Stephen John Smoogen smooge@redhat.com --- This is meant only for Fedora 40, 41, 42, rawhide.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |benson_muite@emailplus.org Flags| |fedora-review? Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |benson_muite@emailplus.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #3 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
Issues: ======= - Dist tag is present.
===== 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", "BSD 3-Clause License". 111 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-cloup/2323710-python- cloup/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.13, /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages [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. [ ]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 6222 bytes in 1 files. [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. [ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [ ]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %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: python3-cloup-3.0.5-1.fc42.noarch.rpm python-cloup-3.0.5-1.fc42.src.rpm ================================ rpmlint session starts ================================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpm04ch7t0')] checks: 32, packages: 2
python-cloup.src: E: spelling-error ('params', "%description -l en_US params -> paras, prams, para's") 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings, 8 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 4.1 s
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 32, packages: 1
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 4 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 1.2 s
Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/c/cloup/cloup-3.0.5.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : c92b261c7bb7e13004930f3fb4b3edad8de2d1f12994dcddbe05bc21990443c5 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c92b261c7bb7e13004930f3fb4b3edad8de2d1f12994dcddbe05bc21990443c5
Requires -------- python3-cloup (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (python3.13dist(click) < 9~~ with python3.13dist(click) >= 8) python(abi)
Provides -------- python3-cloup: python-cloup python3-cloup python3.13-cloup python3.13dist(cloup) python3dist(cloup)
Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2323710 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: PHP, Perl, C/C++, Ocaml, R, Java, fonts, SugarActivity, Haskell Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Comments: a) The source has tests. Can these be run? b) May want to also package the documentation. It uses sphinx, so if generating html, add a sub-package. Alternatively, generate man pages. Documentation is not a must.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #4 from Stephen John Smoogen smooge@redhat.com --- I have been able to add tests to the spec file, but documentation is pinned to sphinx versions from python-3.8 and various code not in Fedora. Trying to build the docs failed even in a python venv. I don't think I can fix it.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #5 from Stephen John Smoogen smooge@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/smooge/AI_tools/fedora-40... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/smooge/AI_tools/fedora-40...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Created attachment 2055806 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=2055806&action=edit The .spec file difference from Copr build 8209836 to 8214806
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Review Service fedora-review-bot@fedoraproject.org --- Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8214806 (succeeded)
Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-rev...
Please take a look if any issues were found.
--- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service
If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #8 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Seems good. Approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Jonathan Steffan jonathansteffan@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |2323712
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323712 [Bug 2323712] Review Request: omlmd - library to help leverage OCI Artifacts
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |RELEASE_PENDING
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-cloup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
--- Comment #10 from Stephen John Smoogen smooge@redhat.com --- Built in https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=125597350
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2323710
Stephen John Smoogen smooge@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Status|RELEASE_PENDING |CLOSED Last Closed| |2024-11-07 17:35:22
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com