Bug 1889768

Summary: Review Request: oraculum - Backend and API for Fedora QA Dashboard
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: František Zatloukal <fzatlouk>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Miro Hrončok <mhroncok>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: unspecified Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rawhideCC: mhroncok, package-review
Target Milestone: ---Flags: mhroncok: fedora-review?
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-12-10 17:16:16 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Comment 3 Miro Hrončok 2020-10-30 13:56:28 UTC
Spec sanity:


> # Don't forget to also change oraculum/__init__.py

Is this spec file shared with upstream? I don't see this line relevant in Fedora.




> # Test requirements, we need to list these as there is no python3 builddep generator

But there is ;) https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pyproject-rpm-macros




The install section seems like a lot of code. Maybe this can be solved by upstream Makefile or package_data? Let me know if I shall try doing the second option.



https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Scriptlets/#_scriptlets mentions to BR systemd-rpm-macros. Is systemd/systemd-devel actually needed on build time?



> # Remove compiled .py files from /etc after os_install_post
> rm -f %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/testcloud/*.py{c,o}
> rm -rf %{buildroot}%{_sysconfdir}/testcloud/__pycache__

Doing this in %check is ether a neat trick or a dirty hack, depending on the perspective. Either way, no os_install_post action in Fedora currently bytecompiles files in %{_sysconfdir}. Is it really needed? Especially the .pyo thing seems a bit suspicious.

What Fedora/EPEL releases do you target with this spec file?

Comment 4 Miro Hrončok 2020-10-30 14:36:55 UTC
I've also noticed there is no %license.

Comment 7 Miro Hrončok 2020-11-05 15:16:12 UTC
One more thing that seems a bit odd. oraculum is not on PyPI. This is not (yet) a requirement in the Python guidelines, but it makes sense to me, when the package provides python3dist(oraculum) that `pip install oraculum` should install more or less the same thing.

Otherwise the spec looks sane and I'll proceed with Fedora-Review shortly.

Comment 8 Miro Hrončok 2020-12-10 17:16:16 UTC
Funny enough, this was already imported: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/oraculum/blob/master/f/oraculum.spec