Bug 1449470

Summary: Review Request: python3-coverage - Code coverage testing module for Python
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Aurelien Bompard <aurelien>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Neal Gompa <ngompa13>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: ngompa13, package-review
Target Milestone: ---Flags: ngompa13: 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: 2017-08-25 13:40:21 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 Aurelien Bompard 2017-05-10 05:28:02 UTC
Spec URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-coverage/python3-coverage.spec
SRPM URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-coverage/python3-coverage-4.4-1.el7.centos.src.rpm
Description:
This module is already provided by RHEL/CentOS, but only in the Python2 version. I am submitting this package, based on the main one, which only builds the Python3 version, and I'll only request the EPEL7 branch (and later EPEL versions).

Fedora Account System Username: abompard

There are some rpmlint warnings, but they are identical to those in the main python-coverage package, so I thought being as close as possible to the main package was more important.

Comment 1 Neal Gompa 2017-06-03 12:20:21 UTC
Taking this review.

Comment 2 Neal Gompa 2017-06-03 12:21:32 UTC
fedora-review failed:

> WARNING: Cannot download url: http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/c/coverage/coverage-4.4.tar.gz

Comment 3 Neal Gompa 2017-06-03 12:25:02 UTC
> BuildRequires:  python3-pkgversion-macros

This package has been superseded by "python-srpm-macros" and thus doesn't build in Rawhide anymore. Please replace.

Comment 5 Neal Gompa 2017-06-03 23:22:38 UTC
- rpmlint issue:
  * python3-coverage.src: W: invalid-license GPL

Please fix the license field so that the license tags are correct.

Comment 6 Aurelien Bompard 2017-06-04 09:31:19 UTC
Fixed, thanks. One of the files specifies GPLv2, the other two GPL files don't specify a version. The original python-coverage package had a licence tag without the version on the GPL, should I keep it that way?

Spec URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-coverage/python3-coverage.spec
SRPM URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-coverage/python3-coverage-4.4.1-1.el7.centos.src.rpm

Comment 7 Neal Gompa 2017-06-05 02:20:44 UTC
(In reply to Aurelien Bompard from comment #6)
> Fixed, thanks. One of the files specifies GPLv2, the other two GPL files
> don't specify a version. The original python-coverage package had a licence
> tag without the version on the GPL, should I keep it that way?
> 

My understanding is that all of the files are actually MIT / GPLv2. The unbundled JavaScript packages appear to be MIT or GPLv2 explicitly, at least according to the author[1][2] for the first, and Debian for the last two[3][4].

[1]: https://github.com/cowboy/jquery-throttle-debounce
[2]: http://benalman.com/about/license/
[3]: http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/libj/libjs-jquery-hotkeys/libjs-jquery-hotkeys_0~20130707+git2d51e3a9+dfsg-2_copyright
[4]: http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/libj/libjs-jquery-isonscreen/libjs-jquery-isonscreen_1.2.0-1_copyright

python-coverage should be appropriately fixed.

Comment 8 Neal Gompa 2017-06-05 02:22:26 UTC
Review notes:

- Follows Python packaging guidelines for EPEL
- Builds and installs
- No rpmlint issues of note
- No fedora-review issues of note

PACKAGE APPROVED.

Comment 9 Aurelien Bompard 2017-06-05 08:03:43 UTC
Thanks for your excellent review, Neal.

Comment 10 Aurelien Bompard 2017-08-25 13:40:21 UTC
There were two parallel reviews of this package, the other one was added before this one, so I'll join forces with the other maintainer. Thanks and sorry for the duplicated effort.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1294860 ***