Bug 1348775

I'll take a look at this one.

I see only two problems that need fixing.

1) You're missing the python_provide macro, which we're going to use to ease the transition from python2 as default to python3 as default.  See an example usage in this specfile http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-twiggy.git/tree/python-twiggy.spec and see the mention about it in the python guidelines here:  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro

2) The LICENSE file is in the %doc line (where we used to put it) but it has its own macro now %license.  See the spec file above for python-twiggy for an example.

Fix the rpmlint error given below
python2-unidiff.noarch: E: description-line-too-long C python-unidiff is a Python library to parse and interact with unified diffs (patches).

(In reply to Ralph Bean from comment #2)
> I see only two problems that need fixing.
> 
> 1) You're missing the python_provide macro, which we're going to use to ease
> the transition from python2 as default to python3 as default.  See an
> example usage in this specfile
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/python-twiggy.git/tree/python-twiggy.
> spec and see the mention about it in the python guidelines here: 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro
> 
> 2) The LICENSE file is in the %doc line (where we used to put it) but it has
> its own macro now %license.  See the spec file above for python-twiggy for
> an example.

Ah yes, I did know about both these new guidelines but I had just cargo-culted one of my older packages which hasn't been updated to use these yet, so I forgot...

Updated to use %license and %python_provide, wrapped %description.

https://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/python-unidiff/python-unidiff.spec
https://fedorapeople.org/~dcallagh/python-unidiff/python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc24.src.rpm

Thanks Dan!  Package is approved.  :)


===== 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". 5 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/threebean/1348775-python-unidiff/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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 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 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:
[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.
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
     justified.
[-]: 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.
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python2-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc23.noarch.rpm
          python3-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc23.noarch.rpm
          python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc23.src.rpm
python3-unidiff.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unidiff
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python3-unidiff.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary unidiff
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.



Requires
--------
python3-unidiff (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    python(abi)

python2-unidiff (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)



Provides
--------
python3-unidiff:
    python3-unidiff

python2-unidiff:
    python-unidiff
    python2-unidiff



Source checksums
----------------
http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/u/unidiff/unidiff-0.5.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 344330ec3637e96b44dca77e086b205645b55648cf4d2b80fc673200f8a6a7e9
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 344330ec3637e96b44dca77e086b205645b55648cf4d2b80fc673200f8a6a7e9


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1348775
Buildroot used: fedora-23-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP
Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6

Thanks Ralph. :-)

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

python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6df510b512

python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0441bcd0c8

python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-6df510b512

python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for
instructions on how to install test updates.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-0441bcd0c8

python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

python-unidiff-0.5.2-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.