Bug 1302770

fale's scratch build of python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm for f24 failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12893614

It seems like you are missing the buildrequire to python2-devel and python3-devel

This package can build properly without the bug 1305101. It's a nice to have, but is not a must

We have to wait for 1305101 being resolved

Wrongly removed Fabio from assignee during resolution of bugzilla "mid air collision"

(In reply to Fabio Alessandro Locati from comment #3)
> This package can build properly without the bug 1305101. It's a nice to
> have, but is not a must

I don't like to edit spec file to hack around someone else's bugs, I prefer to wait for the bug to being fixed

It's not a bug. Currently the policy affirms that you should use python2- if is present otherwise use python-.

While not including (in your spec) python2-devel and python3-devel is a big bug (it does not compile)

fale's scratch build of python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm for f24 failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12893731

Please provide a link to a proper SRPM. SPEC only is not sufficient and fedora-review tool will complain.

You should use %global srcname %{pypi_name} to not confuse %python_provide about wrong Obsoletes.

rpmbuild log https://fedorapeople.org/~germano/package_reviews/python-coveralls/log

@Ralph, as I was saying to you yesterday in the #fedora-devel chan, this requrement seems to be not strictly necessary, but I guess I've been able to tell you so way after you posted here.

@Germano, it seems like the package does create a binary in /usr/bin/coveralls that you are not putting in any package. Will this package goal be providing this binary file and/or the APIs?

(In reply to Fabio Alessandro Locati from comment #11)
> @Germano, it seems like the package does create a binary in
> /usr/bin/coveralls that you are not putting in any package. Will this
> package goal be providing this binary file and/or the APIs?

python-netdiff uses coveralls only on travis-ci to send reports to the online service

Well, at the moment let's assume that we want to package the binary too. How the spec file should be modified?

It's important to understand how this package can be used, if as binary, as API or both, since Fedora have different policies for different cases.
If a package is used only in it's binary form, it makes sense to have only one package (so no python2- and python3-) that have to use python3 compilation, while if APIs are important we need both python2 and python3 packages.

(In reply to Fabio Alessandro Locati from comment #14)
> It's important to understand how this package can be used, if as binary, as
> API or both

Both

So add the file to the python3 package as /usr/bin/coveralls and /usr/bin/coveralls-3 and to the python2 package as /usr/bin/coveralls-2.

On EPEL you'll need to make /usr/bin/coveralls point to the python2 version since no python3 version is available for such platforms

(In reply to Fabio Alessandro Locati from comment #16)
> So add the file to the python3 package as /usr/bin/coveralls and
> /usr/bin/coveralls-3 and to the python2 package as /usr/bin/coveralls-2.
> 
> On EPEL you'll need to make /usr/bin/coveralls point to the python2 version
> since no python3 version is available for such platforms

I am reading as example the spec file [1] but I feel confused while examining line 133 and 134:
%{_bindir}/coverage-3*
%{_bindir}/coverage3

why there are both of them?

[1]: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-coverage.git/tree/python-coverage.spec

(In reply to Germano Massullo from comment #0)
> Spec URL:
> https://fedorapeople.org/~germano/package_reviews/python-coveralls/python-
> coveralls.spec

I inserted
%{_bindir}/python2-coveralls
and
%{_bindir}/python3-coveralls
in their proper places.

Hello,

Please Germano, test your spec files before publishing them. This version does not compile:

RPM build errors:
error: File not found: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.x86_64/usr/share/licenses/python2-coveralls/LICENSE
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.x86_64/usr/bin/python2-coveralls
    Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.mnVX8R (%license)
    File not found: /builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.x86_64/usr/share/licenses/python2-coveralls/LICENSE

https://fedorapeople.org/~germano/package_reviews/python-coveralls/python-coveralls.spec

https://fedorapeople.org/~germano/package_reviews/python-coveralls/python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm

Nice job Germano, the package is APPROVED :)

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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 7 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fale/python-
     coveralls/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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.
[x]: 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 20480 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]: 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]: 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]: 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
     python2-coveralls , python3-coveralls
[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.
[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]: 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).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python2-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm
          python3-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.noarch.rpm
          python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) io -> oi, Io, ii
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) py -> pt, p, y
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US json -> son, j son
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi, Io, ii
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coveralls-py2
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) io -> oi, Io, ii
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) py -> pt, p, y
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US json -> son, j son
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi, Io, ii
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coveralls-py3
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coveralls
python-coveralls.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) io -> oi, Io, ii
python-coveralls.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) py -> pt, p, y
python-coveralls.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y
python-coveralls.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US json -> son, j son
python-coveralls.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US io -> oi, Io, ii
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 18 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coveralls-py3
python3-coveralls.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coveralls
python2-coveralls.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary coveralls-py2
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.



Requires
--------
python3-coveralls (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/env
    /usr/bin/python3
    python(abi)
    python3-coverage
    python3-docopt
    python3-requests

python2-coveralls (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/env
    /usr/bin/python2
    python(abi)
    python-docopt
    python2-coverage
    python2-requests



Provides
--------
python3-coveralls:
    python3-coveralls

python2-coveralls:
    python-coveralls
    python2-coveralls



Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/c/coveralls/coveralls-1.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 34160385c13b0c43691ab11c080d4b10dabe3280fc0b2173c731efc5db836808
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 34160385c13b0c43691ab11c080d4b10dabe3280fc0b2173c731efc5db836808


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -rn rpmbuild/SRPMS/python-coveralls-1.1-1.fc23.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-23-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-coveralls