Bug 1718685

 - The current source is 404? Pypi doesn't seem to provide the archive.

The requested URL returned error: 404

   Use:

Source0:        %url/archive/v%{version}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}.tar.gz

 - Please use a more detailed Summary/Description: what is SmartyPants, what does it do

 - The license shorthand should be

License:        BSD

 -  You should use the GitHub archive to run the tests

%check
%{__python3} setup.py test

 - Remove shebang of Python scripts in %prep (including the tests files which fails otherwise)

python3-smartypants.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/smartypants.py 644 /usr/bin/python 


for lib in $(find -type f -name '*.py'); do
 sed '1{\@^#!@d}' $lib > $lib.new &&
 touch -r $lib $lib.new &&
 mv $lib.new $lib
done
sed 's|#!/usr/bin/env python|#!/usr/bin/python3|' smartypants > smartypants.new &&
touch -r smartypants smartypants.new &&
mv smartypants.new smartypants
chmod +x smartypants

 - Capitalize summary: 

python-smartypants-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C smartypants documentation




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.
[!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "BSD (unspecified)". 26 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/bob/packaging/review/python-smartypants/review-python-
     smartypants/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[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]: 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 does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on
     packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly
     versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST
     use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate.
[x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== SHOULD items =====

Generic:
[-]: Uses parallel make %{?_smp_mflags} macro.
[-]: 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
     python3-smartypants
[?]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: 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:
[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-smartypants-2.0.1-1.fc31.noarch.rpm
          python-smartypants-doc-2.0.1-1.fc31.noarch.rpm
          python-smartypants-2.0.1-1.fc31.src.rpm
python3-smartypants.noarch: W: invalid-license BSD License
python3-smartypants.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.7/site-packages/smartypants.py 644 /usr/bin/python 
python3-smartypants.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary smartypants
python-smartypants-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C smartypants documentation
python-smartypants-doc.noarch: W: invalid-license BSD License
python-smartypants-doc.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/python-smartypants-doc/html/objects.inv
python-smartypants.src: W: invalid-license BSD License
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 6 warnings.

Thank you Robert-André.

I have accepted all your proposals in the new version:

* Tue Jun 11 2019 José Matos <jamatos> - 2.0.1-2
- fix source url, license short hand, description and summary.
- remove shebang lines and make smartypants a shebang line use python3.


Spec URL: https://jamatos.fedorapeople.org/python-smartypants.spec
SRPM URL: https://jamatos.fedorapeople.org/python-smartypants-2.0.1-2.fc30.src.rpm

 - The goal of touching files:

 touch -r $lib $lib.new &&
 mv $lib.new $lib

is to keep timestamps, removing this will remove original timestamps.

 - Capitalize summaries: 

python-smartypants-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C smartypants documentation


Summary:        plug-in that easily translates ASCII punctuation characters into smart entities

Summary:        python-smartypants documentation


Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import.

(In reply to Robert-André Mauchin from comment #3)
>  - The goal of touching files:
> 
>  touch -r $lib $lib.new &&
>  mv $lib.new $lib
> 
> is to keep timestamps, removing this will remove original timestamps.

My reading from the guidelines is that this is not necessary:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_shebang_lines

I do not mind changing the timestamps because we are really changing the files.

If you insist I will do it but it seems to me overkill to retain the original timestamp.
>  - Capitalize summaries: 
> 
> python-smartypants-doc.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C smartypants
> documentation
> 
> 
> Summary:        plug-in that easily translates ASCII punctuation characters
> into smart entities
> 
> Summary:        python-smartypants documentation
> 
> 
> Package approved. Please fix the aforementioned issue before import.

I will fix the first. The second seems to me that it is not necessary, the name of the package is in small caps. :-)

(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-smartypants

FEDORA-2019-adb5f08aab has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-adb5f08aab

FEDORA-2019-f41461c169 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 29. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-f41461c169

python-ghp-import2-1.0.1-2.fc30, python-micawber-0.4.1-2.fc30, python-phpserialize-1.3-2.fc30, python-smartypants-2.0.1-2.fc30, python-typogrify-2.0.7-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 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-2019-adb5f08aab

python-ghp-import2-1.0.1-2.fc29, python-micawber-0.4.1-2.fc29, python-smartypants-2.0.1-2.fc29, python-typogrify-2.0.7-2.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 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-2019-f41461c169

python-ghp-import2-1.0.1-2.fc29, python-micawber-0.4.1-2.fc29, python-smartypants-2.0.1-2.fc29, python-typogrify-2.0.7-2.fc29 has been pushed to the Fedora 29 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

python-ghp-import2-1.0.1-2.fc30, python-micawber-0.4.1-2.fc30, python-phpserialize-1.3-2.fc30, python-smartypants-2.0.1-2.fc30, python-typogrify-2.0.7-2.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.