[Bug 1884063] New: Review Request: python-fastapi - FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
Bug ID: 1884063 Summary: Review Request: python-fastapi - FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: itamar@ispbrasil.com.br QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://itamarjp.fedorapeople.org/review/python-fastapi.spec SRPM URL: https://itamarjp.fedorapeople.org/review/python-fastapi-0.61.1-1.fc33.src.rp...
Description: FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production
Fedora Account System Username: itamarjp
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1884065 Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884065 [Bug 1884065] Review Request: python-starlette - The little ASGI library that shines
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends On| |1884077
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884077 [Bug 1884077] Review Request: python-python-multipart -A streaming multipart parser for Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
Andy Mender andymenderunix@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |andymenderunix@gmail.com Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |andymenderunix@gmail.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
--- Comment #1 from Andy Mender andymenderunix@gmail.com --- COPR project with python-fastapi + dependencies: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/andymenderunix/python-fastapi
License: None
The license is actually MIT.
%check #disable tests for now (missing deps) ##%{__python3} setup.py test
Could you indicate in the comment which dependencies are missing?
rpmlint reported some extra items (covered in the full review)
Full review below:
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "*No copyright* Expat License". 720 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/amender/rpmbuild/SPECS/python-fastapi/copr- build-1693705/review-python-fastapi/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 [?]: 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 30720 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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. [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: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. Review: builds in COPR. [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). [?]: 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. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. Review: Tests are currently disabled due to missing dependencies. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [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-fastapi-0.61.1-1.fc34.noarch.rpm python-fastapi-0.61.1-1.fc34.src.rpm python3-fastapi.noarch: E: summary-too-long C FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production python3-fastapi.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production Review: a single %description line can have at most 80 characters. python3-fastapi.noarch: W: invalid-license None python3-fastapi.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/fastapi/py.typed python-fastapi.src: E: summary-too-long C FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production Review: 80 characters max python-fastapi.src: E: description-line-too-long C FastAPI framework, high performance, easy to learn, fast to code, ready for production python-fastapi.src: W: invalid-license None python-fastapi.src:37: W: macro-in-comment %{__python3} Review: Use %% instead of a single % to escape the macro 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 3 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. (none): E: no installed packages by name python3-fastapi
Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/f/fastapi/fastapi-0.61.1.tar.... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 61ed73b4304413a2ea618d1b95ea866ee386e0e62dd8659c4f5059286f4a39c2 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 61ed73b4304413a2ea618d1b95ea866ee386e0e62dd8659c4f5059286f4a39c2
Requires -------- python3-fastapi (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi)
Provides -------- python3-fastapi: python-fastapi python3-fastapi python3.9-fastapi python3.9dist(fastapi) python3dist(fastapi)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
--- Comment #2 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br --- Spec URL: https://itamarjp.fedorapeople.org/review/python-fastapi.spec SRPM URL: https://itamarjp.fedorapeople.org/review/python-fastapi-0.61.1-1.fc33.src.rp...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
Andy Mender andymenderunix@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #3 from Andy Mender andymenderunix@gmail.com --- rpmlint reported the following:
python-fastapi.spec:39: W: macro-in-comment %{__python3}
In %changelog entries and comments, use %% to escape macros like so:
#%%{__python3} setup.py test
You can do this on package import, since other than that, it looks okay. Package approved.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
--- Comment #4 from Itamar Reis Peixoto itamar@ispbrasil.com.br --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/29351
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
--- Comment #5 from Gwyn Ciesla gwync@protonmail.com --- (fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-fastapi
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063
Andy Mender andymenderunix@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed| |2020-11-24 20:14:30
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063 Bug 1884063 depends on bug 1884065, which changed state.
Bug 1884065 Summary: Review Request: python-starlette - The little ASGI library that shines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884065
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884063 Bug 1884063 depends on bug 1884077, which changed state.
Bug 1884077 Summary: Review Request: python-multipart - A streaming multipart parser for Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1884077
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |CLOSED Resolution|--- |WONTFIX
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
bugzilla＠redhat.com