[Bug 2133665] New: Review Request: python-syslog-rfc5424-formatter - Logging formatter which produces well-formatted RFC5424 Syslog Protocol messages
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133665
Bug ID: 2133665 Summary: Review Request: python-syslog-rfc5424-formatter - Logging formatter which produces well-formatted RFC5424 Syslog Protocol messages Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: lbarczio@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/lbarczio/fedora-packaging... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lbarczio/fedora-packaging... Description: This module implements a python logging formatter which produces well-formed RFC5424-compatible Syslog messages to a given socket. Fedora Account System Username:lbarczio
(Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/lbarczio/fedora-packaging/build/4899... )
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133665
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |msuchy@redhat.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |msuchy@redhat.com Flags| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- Taking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133665
--- Comment #2 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- I would add to %files: %doc CHANGES.md
There is no %check. I see two options
1. upstream has test in upstream git, but it is not included in distributed tarball. You can include the whole git-archive as SOURCE1 (while still build the package from SOURCE0) and run test from that git-arhive. In such case, you can even generate documentation for -doc subpackage. Or: 2. even better, do not use pypi sources and use GitHub releases, e.g., https://github.com/EasyPost/syslog-rfc5424-formatter/releases/tag/v1.2.3 which include both documentation and tests. Or: 3. at least try to import the module in %check
Beside this, I see no issues.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133665
--- Comment #3 from Laura Barcziová lbarczio@redhat.com --- I added the line to %files. Regarding the %check, I added the import check since the tests require some packages which are not in Fedora.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lbarczio/fedora-packaging... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/lbarczio/fedora-packaging...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2133665
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- 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", "ISC License", "*No copyright* ISC License". 8 files have unknown license. [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 2 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 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
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. [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. [?]: 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. [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.
APPROVED
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com