Bug 1381935
Summary: | Review Request: python-distro - Linux Distribution - a Linux OS platform information API | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Miroslav Suchý <msuchy> |
Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Neal Gompa <ngompa13> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | ngompa13, package-review, riehecky |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Reopened |
Target Release: | --- | Flags: | ngompa13:
fedora-review+
|
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: | 2017-01-17 22:51:18 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Miroslav Suchý
2016-10-05 11:47:33 UTC
Taking this review. * Naming is correct. * License is correct. * Python 2 and Python 3 subpackages are being correctly generated for Fedora. However, I see a few issues: * Starting with Fedora 23, the default implementation of commands should be Python 3 instead of Python 2. Please switch /usr/bin/distro to Python 3. * You are hard-requiring /bin/lsb_release, which upstream says is not necessary. Please downgrade it to Recommends, as the lsb package has a large web of dependencies that people may not necessarily want. * If you intend to package this for EPEL, you'll need to do a little bit more work to support Python 3 in EPEL 6/7. For reference, here's a couple of examples[1][2]. [1]: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/python-nose2/sources/spec/ [2]: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/python-pika/sources/spec/ Oh, also, your description in the python3 subpackage says it's the python 2 version, which it obviously is not. You may choose to wrap the common description in a macro and reuse it for the description sections, too. (In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #2) > * You are hard-requiring /bin/lsb_release, which upstream says is not > necessary. Please downgrade it to Recommends, as the lsb package has a large > web of dependencies that people may not necessarily want. There is a traceback when the binary is not available. So for now, I want to have there hard requires. I will flip it to Recommends once resolved. > * If you intend to package this for EPEL, you'll need to do a little bit > more work to support Python 3 in EPEL 6/7. For reference, here's a couple of > examples[1][2]. I plan to create only python2 subpackage for el6 and el7. Updated: Spec URL: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/python-distro/python-distro.spec SRPM URL: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/python-distro/python-distro-1.0.0-5.fc24.src.rpm I am now generating just python2 subpackage on EL6,7. /usr/bin/distro now use python3 on fedoras. I chosen to not use macro for description. This way it more readable and maintainable for me. I hope this is not a problem. Comments and issues: * A simpler way to do the %install phase is to simply re-order it so that %py2_install occurs first, then %py3_install next. That should properly overwrite /usr/bin/distro. After all, the only case where you have /usr/bin/distro point to Python 2 is when the Python 3 subpackage doesn't exist. * The conditional inside the Python 3 subpackage conditional for the files list is redundant. You're already going to have /usr/bin/distro in the python3 subpackage if it's being built. * Your rpm changelog is in the wrong format (lacks email address) and has a duplicate entry rather than unique entries. * It's fine with not using a macro for the description. That's purely a preference. You've fixed the description in each subpackage, which is enough. > A simpler way to do the %install phase is to simply re-order it ... Done. > The conditional inside the Python 3 subpackage conditional for the files list is redundant. Fixed. > * Your rpm changelog is in the wrong format (lacks email address) a) I have misconfigured Tito (which create that entries for me). It have email now. b) The email address is not mandatory. It is actually optional. Albeit most maintainers use it. > and has a duplicate entry rather than unique entries. I actually done so many releases. Only after that I found some problem so I created another release. So it really reflect what I have been doing. I prefer it over keeping the same release number for all intermittent releases. Updated: Spec URL: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/python-distro/python-distro.spec SRPM URL: http://miroslav.suchy.cz/fedora/python-distro/python-distro-1.0.0-6.fc24.src.rpm It looks good to me. Please follow up with upstream on the requirement for /usr/bin/lsb_release. It should not be mandatory on systems with os-release(5). But otherwise... APPROVED. Thank you. Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-distro python-distro-1.0.0-6.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-2016-7f7fa72af4 python-distro-1.0.0-6.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-2016-0295334433 python-distro-1.0.0-6.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-2016-879d7c7f3e python-distro-1.0.0-6.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2016-8579a792ba python-distro-1.0.0-6.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 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-EPEL-2016-42f9ffc3e9 python-distro-1.0.0-6.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. python-distro-1.0.0-6.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. python-distro-1.0.0-6.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. python-distro-1.0.0-6.el6 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 6 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. python-distro-1.0.1-2.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2017-2d4b482b6f python-distro-1.0.1-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2017-2d4b482b6f python-distro-1.0.1-2.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |