Bug 1380104

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 %license.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1380104-python-backports-
     functools_lru_cache/licensecheck.txt
[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
     Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
     packages(system-python-libs), /usr/lib/python3.5/site-
     packages/backports(python3-configparser), /usr/lib/python2.7/site-
     packages/backports(python-backports)
[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 4 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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
[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.
    https://github.com/jaraco/backports.functools_lru_cache/issues
[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
     -backports-functools_lru_cache , python3-backports-functools_lru_cache
[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.
[x]: %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-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
          python3-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm
          python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc26.src.rpm
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) functools -> functions
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lru -> URL
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functools -> functions
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lru -> URL
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) functools -> functions
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lru -> URL
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functools -> functions
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lru -> URL
python-backports-functools_lru_cache.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python-backports-functools_lru_cache.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) functools -> functions
python-backports-functools_lru_cache.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lru -> URL
python-backports-functools_lru_cache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python-backports-functools_lru_cache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functools -> functions
python-backports-functools_lru_cache.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lru -> URL
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 18 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) functools -> functions
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lru -> URL
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functools -> functions
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lru -> URL
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) functools -> functions
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) lru -> URL
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US functools -> functions
python3-backports-functools_lru_cache.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US lru -> URL
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 12 warnings.



Requires
--------
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)

python3-backports-functools_lru_cache (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)



Provides
--------
python2-backports-functools_lru_cache:
    python-backports-functools_lru_cache
    python2-backports-functools_lru_cache
    python2.7dist(backports.functools-lru-cache)
    python2dist(backports.functools-lru-cache)

python3-backports-functools_lru_cache:
    python3-backports-functools_lru_cache
    python3.5dist(backports.functools-lru-cache)
    python3dist(backports.functools-lru-cache)



Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/b/backports.functools_lru_cache/backports.functools_lru_cache-1.2.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 1c20e07f1a8a36a19d5d258b6b076e588d78d8fc7c2c4487ffe3a280f55a7bd1
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1c20e07f1a8a36a19d5d258b6b076e588d78d8fc7c2c4487ffe3a280f55a7bd1


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1380104 --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:
[!]: 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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed
     output of licensecheck in /home/gil/1380104-python-backports-
     functools_lru_cache/licensecheck.txt
 All source file are without license headers. Please, ask to upstream 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

[!]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.

[!]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
    https://github.com/jaraco/backports.functools_lru_cache/issues

[!]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.

have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196037 ?

(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #3)
> have time for this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1196037 ?

Sure!

https://github.com/jaraco/backports.functools_lru_cache/issues/8

(In reply to Jon Ciesla from comment #5)
> https://github.com/jaraco/backports.functools_lru_cache/issues/8

we should wait until upstream will not give us an answer?

Upstream answered.

https://github.com/jaraco/skeleton/issues/1

They said no.

Approved

Thank you!

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

python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-a0d465fefd

python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.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-2016-1065ca8dcb

python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

python-backports-functools_lru_cache-1.2.1-1.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Why is a python3 package being built?  Isn't this functionality already in python 3.3+ ?

That's a great question. :)  Yes.  No idea. :)  Should I just drop it or do proper Obs/Prov?

I just dropped it (and added EPEL support) as nothing should have required it.

Thank you!