| Summary: | Review Request: python-qtconsole - Jupyter Qt console | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Mukundan Ragavan <nonamedotc> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | gil cattaneo <puntogil> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | package-review, puntogil, quantum.analyst |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | puntogil:
fedora-review+
|
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-08-28 22:34:46 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Mukundan Ragavan
2016-09-24 21:33:29 UTC
have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1366845 ? thanks in advance Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines ===== 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. [?]: 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". 47 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1379090-python- qtconsole/licensecheck.txt Some file report this license header: "Copyright (c) Jupyter Development Team. Distributed under the terms of the Modified BSD License." but most of the sources file are devoid of this information. Please, contact upstream and ask to confirm the licensing of code and/or content/s, and add license headers https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/qtconsole, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/qtconsole [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site- packages/qtconsole, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/qtconsole [?]: 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. ./qtconsole-4.2.1/examples/jupyter-qtconsole.desktop [-]: 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 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]: 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: [-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages. Note: Package contains font files [-]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2-qtconsole , python3-qtconsole , python-qtconsole-doc [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: 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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.2.21 starting (python version = 3.5.1)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata Mock Version: 1.2.21 INFO: Mock Version: 1.2.21 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/gil/1379090-python-qtconsole/results/python-qtconsole-doc-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/1379090-python-qtconsole/results/python3-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/1379090-python-qtconsole/results/python2-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-i386/root/ --releasever 26 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/gil/1379090-python-qtconsole/results/python-qtconsole-doc-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/1379090-python-qtconsole/results/python3-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm /home/gil/1379090-python-qtconsole/results/python2-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python3-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python-qtconsole-doc-4.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python-qtconsole-4.2.1-1.fc26.src.rpm python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Jupyter -> Jupiter, Junketeer python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt based, Qt-based, Based python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-qtconsole-2 python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-qtconsole python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-qtconsole-2.7 python3-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Jupyter -> Jupiter, Junketeer python3-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt based, Qt-based, Based python3-qtconsole.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-qtconsole-3 python3-qtconsole.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary jupyter-qtconsole-3.5 python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C qtconsole documentation python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv python-qtconsole.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Jupyter -> Jupiter, Junketeer python-qtconsole.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt based, Qt-based, Based 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 14 warnings. Requires -------- python2-qtconsole (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python-ipykernel python-jupyter-client python-jupyter_core python-pygments python-setuptools python-traitlets python-qtconsole-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python3-qtconsole (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3-ipykernel python3-jupyter-client python3-jupyter_core python3-pygments python3-setuptools python3-traitlets Provides -------- python2-qtconsole: python-qtconsole python2-qtconsole python2.7dist(qtconsole) python2dist(qtconsole) python-qtconsole-doc: python-qtconsole-doc python3-qtconsole: python3-qtconsole python3.5dist(qtconsole) python3dist(qtconsole) Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/q/qtconsole/qtconsole-4.2.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 25ec7d345528b3e8f3c91be349dd3c699755f206dc4b6ec668e2e5dd60ea18ef CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 25ec7d345528b3e8f3c91be349dd3c699755f206dc4b6ec668e2e5dd60ea18ef Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1379090 --plugins Python -m fedora-rawhide-i386 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-i386 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 Issues:
[?]: 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". 47 files have unknown
license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1379090-python-
qtconsole/licensecheck.txt
Some file report this license header:
"Copyright (c) Jupyter Development Team.
Distributed under the terms of the Modified BSD License."
but most of the sources file are devoid of this information.
Please, contact upstream and ask to confirm the licensing of code and/or content/s, and add license headers
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification
https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/qtconsole,
/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/qtconsole
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
packages/qtconsole, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/qtconsole
[!]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
./qtconsole-4.2.1/examples/jupyter-qtconsole.desktop
Please, fix also these rpmlint problem:
python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt based, Qt-based, Based
python3-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt based, Qt-based, Based
python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C qtconsole documentation
python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv
python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv
python-qtconsole.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt based, Qt-based, Based
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > Issues: > > [?]: 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". 47 files have unknown > license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1379090-python- > qtconsole/licensecheck.txt > > Some file report this license header: > "Copyright (c) Jupyter Development Team. > Distributed under the terms of the Modified BSD License." > but most of the sources file are devoid of this information. > Please, contact upstream and ask to confirm the licensing of code and/or > content/s, and add license headers > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification > https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues I will file a report with upstream. > > [!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. > Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/qtconsole, > /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/qtconsole > [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site- > packages/qtconsole, /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/qtconsole > Fixed. > > [!]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > ./qtconsole-4.2.1/examples/jupyter-qtconsole.desktop > Fixed. > Please, fix also these rpmlint problem: > python2-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> > Qt based, Qt-based, Based > > python3-qtconsole.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> > Qt based, Qt-based, Based > > python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C qtconsole > documentation Fixed. > python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv > python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 > /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv > I don't think this is a valid warning in this case - at least as far as I can tell. objects.inv is a sphinx generated compressed file. http://sphinx-objectsinv-encoderdecoder.readthedocs.io/en/latest/syntax.html > python-qtconsole.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Qtbased -> Qt > based, Qt-based, Based Fixed. Spec URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-qtconsole/round2/python-qtconsole.spec SRPM URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-qtconsole/round2/python-qtconsole-4.2.1-2.fc24.src.rpm Changelog - * Sat Sep 24 2016 Mukundan Ragavan <nonamedotc> - 4.2.1-2 - Fix typos in description - Fix typos in summary - Add BR: desktop-file-utils - Add desktop files (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #4) > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > > Issues: > > > > [?]: 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". 47 files have unknown > > license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1379090-python- > > qtconsole/licensecheck.txt > > > > Some file report this license header: > > "Copyright (c) Jupyter Development Team. > > Distributed under the terms of the Modified BSD License." > > but most of the sources file are devoid of this information. > > Please, contact upstream and ask to confirm the licensing of code and/or > > content/s, and add license headers > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > > LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification > > https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues > > I will file a report with upstream. Waiting for upstream response if this do not take too much time ... (you can provides a PR for fix the problem ...?) > > > > > [!]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > > ./qtconsole-4.2.1/examples/jupyter-qtconsole.desktop > > > > Fixed. Missing scripts, see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#desktop-database > > python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > > /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv > > python-qtconsole-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 > > /usr/share/doc/python-qtconsole-doc/html/objects.inv > > > > I don't think this is a valid warning in this case - at least as far as I > can tell. objects.inv is a sphinx generated compressed file. > > http://sphinx-objectsinv-encoderdecoder.readthedocs.io/en/latest/syntax.html OK (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #6) > (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #4) > > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > > > Issues: > > > > > > [?]: 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". 47 files have unknown > > > license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1379090-python- > > > qtconsole/licensecheck.txt > > > > > > Some file report this license header: > > > "Copyright (c) Jupyter Development Team. > > > Distributed under the terms of the Modified BSD License." > > > but most of the sources file are devoid of this information. > > > Please, contact upstream and ask to confirm the licensing of code and/or > > > content/s, and add license headers > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > > > LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification > > > https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues > > > > I will file a report with upstream. > > Waiting for upstream response if this do not take too much time ... > (you can provides a PR for fix the problem ...?) https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues/142 This is the issue I filed. But, I guess, I can do a PR (based on what reply I get). I would imagine, since the license is clearly spelled out, this should not be a problem? > > > > > > > > > [!]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > > > ./qtconsole-4.2.1/examples/jupyter-qtconsole.desktop > > > > > > > Fixed. > > Missing scripts, see > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#desktop-database This is embarassing! :( Fixed here. https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-qtconsole/round3/python-qtconsole.spec (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #7) > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #6) > > (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #4) > > > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > > > > Issues: > > > > > > > > [?]: 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". 47 files have unknown > > > > license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1379090-python- > > > > qtconsole/licensecheck.txt > > > > > > > > Some file report this license header: > > > > "Copyright (c) Jupyter Development Team. > > > > Distributed under the terms of the Modified BSD License." > > > > but most of the sources file are devoid of this information. > > > > Please, contact upstream and ask to confirm the licensing of code and/or > > > > content/s, and add license headers > > > > > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/ > > > > LicensingGuidelines#License_Clarification > > > > https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues > > > > > > I will file a report with upstream. > > > > Waiting for upstream response if this do not take too much time ... > > (you can provides a PR for fix the problem ...?) > > > https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues/142 > > This is the issue I filed. But, I guess, I can do a PR (based on what reply > I get). > > I would imagine, since the license is clearly spelled out, this should not > be a problem? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [!]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > > > > ./qtconsole-4.2.1/examples/jupyter-qtconsole.desktop > > > > > > > > > > Fixed. > > > > Missing scripts, see > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#desktop-database > > This is embarassing! :( > > Fixed here. > https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python- > qtconsole/round3/python-qtconsole.spec maybe os better: %post -n python2-%{pypi_name} /usr/bin/update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : %postun -n python2-%{pypi_name} /usr/bin/update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : %post -n python3-%{pypi_name} /usr/bin/update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : %postun -n python3-%{pypi_name} /usr/bin/update-desktop-database &> /dev/null || : and still not available
Requires(post): desktop-file-utils
Requires(postun): desktop-file-utils
for each pythonN-%{pypi_name} sub packages
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #8) > (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #7) > > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #6) > > > (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #4) > > > > (In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3) > > https://github.com/jupyter/qtconsole/issues/142 Please, add a comment in the spec file with the url upstream bug Actually, I don't think the scriptlets are even needed for F25+ which is what I am planning to request for anyway. Please note here - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#desktop-database "F23 and F24 only This scriptlet SHOULD NOT be used in Fedora 25 or later." Please see updated spec Spec URL: https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python-qtconsole/round3/python-qtconsole.spec (In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #11) > Actually, I don't think the scriptlets are even needed for F25+ which is > what I am planning to request for anyway. > > Please note here - > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Scriptlets#desktop-database > > "F23 and F24 only > This scriptlet SHOULD NOT be used in Fedora 25 or later." Now i have to be embarrassed, because i did not see the notice on the page of the wiki. My apologize. > Please see updated spec > > Spec URL: > https://nonamedotc.fedorapeople.org/pkgreview/python-packages/python- > qtconsole/round3/python-qtconsole.spec Approved Thank you! Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-qtconsole Shouldn't this be closed as complete? |