Bug 1664926

Spec URL: https://blackfile.fedorapeople.org/lesspass/python-lesspass.spec
SRPM URL: https://blackfile.fedorapeople.org/lesspass/python-lesspass-6.1.0-1.fc29.src.rpm

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.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[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]: 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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files.
[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]: 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]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[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: python3-lesspass-6.1.0-1.fc30.noarch.rpm
          python-lesspass-6.1.0-1.fc30.src.rpm
python3-lesspass.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US generatorUsage -> generator Usage, generator-usage, generator
python3-lesspass.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US env -> enc, en, envy
python3-lesspass.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US promptOptions -> prompt Options, prompt-options, proscriptions
python3-lesspass.noarch: W: invalid-license GPL-3.0
python3-lesspass.noarch: W: no-documentation
python3-lesspass.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary lesspass
python-lesspass.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US generatorUsage -> generator Usage, generator-usage, generator
python-lesspass.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US env -> enc, en, envy
python-lesspass.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US promptOptions -> prompt Options, prompt-options, proscriptions
python-lesspass.src: W: invalid-license GPL-3.0
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 10 warnings.

-> Please fix this and I can approve package


Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


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



Provides
--------
python3-lesspass:
    python3-lesspass
    python3.7dist(lesspass)
    python3dist(lesspass)



Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/l/lesspass/lesspass-6.1.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 58d51f47bd3a533acdd313b663162ae5ce8bd63a8dbad8e5c5b446e8ab18214c
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 58d51f47bd3a533acdd313b663162ae5ce8bd63a8dbad8e5c5b446e8ab18214c


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1664926
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-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

This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.