Bug 1134020

Apart from the fact that the license text file is missing (in the package and upstream), everything is fine so far.

So please add a license text file and inform upstream about this.

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.
[!]: 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 %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. 
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.4, /usr/lib/python3.4/site-
     packages
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
     /usr/lib/python3.4
[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]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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 use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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 0 bytes in 0 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.
[x]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[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).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python3-pykalman
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
   ---> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7454036
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[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: python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python3-pykalman-0.9.5-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.fc22.src.rpm
python-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.noarch: W: no-documentation
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Kalman -> Almanac
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: no-documentation
python-pykalman.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Kalman -> Almanac
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint python-pykalman python3-pykalman
python-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.noarch: W: no-documentation
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Kalman -> Almanac
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: no-documentation
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
python-pykalman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)

python3-pykalman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)



Provides
--------
python-pykalman:
    python-pykalman

python3-pykalman:
    python3-pykalman



Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pykalman/pykalman-0.9.5.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 816af47720d924a4c6016fa74b9e2c8c21165a08d91693c322a1741e8e07fb38
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 816af47720d924a4c6016fa74b9e2c8c21165a08d91693c322a1741e8e07fb38


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1134020
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

Hi Florian,

I've switched from the pypi release to a git archive which includes both docs and the license. I've also filed issues upstream and added them as comments in the spec.

Update spec/srpm:

https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec
https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.src.rpm

Thank you for the review!
Warm regards,
Ankur

Hi Ankur,

There are a few things:

[ ] Please use something like https://github.com/pykalman/pykalman/archive/2aeb4ad80f9dcc4ea182331e33bda7ea4866548e.tar.gz for Source0

[ ] Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB)
  or number of files.
  Note: Documentation size is 1198080 bytes in 98 files.
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation

[ ] Add some more words to %description

[ ] Please write a proper %changelog for the spec
    Since this is my second review of this package, there should have exist at least two entries

After you've fixed these issues, I'll review it again :-)

Regards,
 Florian

Updated spec/srpm:

https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec

https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.src.rpm

I haven't added anything to the description. I don't want to modify upstream's description. If someone doesn't know what a Kalman Filter is, he/she probably shouldn't install the package anyway ;)

* Fri Aug 29 2014 Ankur Sinha <ankursinha AT fedoraproject DOT org> - 0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad
- Updated as per reviewer comments
- Split to different doc sub packages
-

hi!

Did you miss to upload the updated spec? Apart from the release number nothing has changed.

To the description: "The summary should be a short and concise description of the package. The description expands upon this."
For more see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description

To write a descriptive sentence should not be too much to ask.

Regards, 
 Florian

(In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #5)
> hi!
> 
> Did you miss to upload the updated spec? Apart from the release number
> nothing has changed.

Yikes! Sorry. Uploaded now:

https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec
 
> To the description: "The summary should be a short and concise description
> of the package. The description expands upon this."
> For more see:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Summary_and_description
> 
> To write a descriptive sentence should not be too much to ask.

I'm sorry. I really can't think of what to write. It really is *just* a python implementation of a kalman filter. I don't think I should explain what a kalman filter is in the description, for example. Do you have a suggestion?

Thanks,
Ankur

What about these words from pykalman itself:

"This module implements two algorithms for tracking: the Kalman Filter and Kalman Smoother. In addition, model parameters which are traditionally specified by hand can also be learned by the implemented EM algorithm without any labeled training data."

Can you please use the following format:

Spec URL: https://url.to.the.spec
SRPM URL: https://url.to.the.srpm

Cheers,
 Florian

(In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #7)
> What about these words from pykalman itself:
> 
> "This module implements two algorithms for tracking: the Kalman Filter and
> Kalman Smoother. In addition, model parameters which are traditionally
> specified by hand can also be learned by the implemented EM algorithm
> without any labeled training data."

Added. 

> Can you please use the following format:
> 
> Spec URL: https://url.to.the.spec
> SRPM URL: https://url.to.the.srpm

Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec
SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.src.rpm

hi!

Looks good, but hrere are still some issues:

[ ] You didn't increase the release number

[ ] Source0 doesn't work.
    Please replace
    https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{module_name}-%{commit}.tar.gz
    with
    https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz

[ ] In the first %files-section is %doc COPYING missing

Cheers,
 Florian

(In reply to Florian "der-flo" Lehner from comment #9)
> hi!
> 
> Looks good, but hrere are still some issues:
> 
> [ ] You didn't increase the release number

This is not compulsory. Please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Multiple_Changelog_Entries_per_Release

> 
> [ ] Source0 doesn't work.
>     Please replace
>    
> https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{module_name}-
> %{commit}.tar.gz
>     with
>     https://github.com/%{module_name}/%{module_name}/archive/%{commit}.tar.gz

I cannot use the second one. It must end with %{module_name}-%{commit}.tar.gz for rpmbuild to find the source tar. I've updated the source url as per
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Github (I missed out a /%{commit}/ in the URL). It works now.

 
> [ ] In the first %files-section is %doc COPYING missing

Moved COPYING to main packages from doc subpackages.


Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman.spec
SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/pykalman/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.src.rpm

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:
     "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
     /usr/lib/python3.4
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.4/site-packages,
     /usr/lib/python3.4
[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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 593920 bytes in 43 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 %doc.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that
     are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[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 use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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.
[ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[!]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
   ---> I'm ok with this. It's not a blocker for this package.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python-
     pykalman-doc , python3-pykalman , python3-pykalman-doc
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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.
   ---> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7487021
[x]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[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: python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python-pykalman-doc-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python3-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python3-pykalman-doc-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22.src.rpm
python-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python-pykalman-doc.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python3-pykalman.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python3-pykalman-doc.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python-pykalman.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.src: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 3 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint python-pykalman python3-pykalman-doc python3-pykalman python-pykalman-doc
python-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python-pykalman.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python3-pykalman-doc.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python3-pykalman.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Kalman -> Almanac
python3-pykalman.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
python-pykalman-doc.noarch: E: changelog-time-in-future 2014-08-30
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 2 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
python-pykalman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)

python3-pykalman-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python3-pykalman

python3-pykalman (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)

python-pykalman-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python-pykalman



Provides
--------
python-pykalman:
    python-pykalman

python3-pykalman-doc:
    python3-pykalman-doc

python3-pykalman:
    python3-pykalman

python-pykalman-doc:
    python-pykalman-doc



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/pykalman/pykalman/archive/2aeb4ad80f9dcc4ea182331e33bda7ea4866548e/pykalman-2aeb4ad80f9dcc4ea182331e33bda7ea4866548e.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : dd56c8ed5738516a8a7af8a9aa69c3325810851e1336bd930e390cc785be8251
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : dd56c8ed5738516a8a7af8a9aa69c3325810851e1336bd930e390cc785be8251


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1134020
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

===== Solution =====
      APPROVED

Thanks for the quick review Florian :)

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: python-pykalman
Short Description: Kalman Filter, Smoother, and EM Algorithm
Upstream URL: http://pykalman.github.io/
Owners: ankursinha
Branches: f21
InitialCC:

Git done (by process-git-requests).

python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21

python-pykalman-0.9.5-1.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository.

Package python-pykalman-0.9.5-2.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21:
* should fix your issue,
* was pushed to the Fedora 21 testing repository,
* should be available at your local mirror within two days.
Update it with:
# su -c 'yum update --enablerepo=updates-testing python-pykalman-0.9.5-2.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21'
as soon as you are able to.
Please go to the following url:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2014-10255/python-pykalman-0.9.5-2.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21
then log in and leave karma (feedback).

python-pykalman-0.9.5-4.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pykalman-0.9.5-4.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21

python-pykalman-0.9.5-4.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-pykalman-0.9.5-4.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22

python-pykalman-0.9.5-4.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

python-pykalman-0.9.5-4.20140827git2aeb4ad.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.