Bug 2115797

Summary: Review Request: python-janus - Thread-safe asyncio-aware queue for Python
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Roman Inflianskas <rominf>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Paul Wouters <paul.wouters>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: package-review, paul.wouters
Target Milestone: ---Flags: paul.wouters: 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: 2022-09-09 11:22:27 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 Roman Inflianskas 2022-08-05 12:20:00 UTC
Spec URL: https://rominf.fedorapeople.org/python-janus.spec
SRPM URL: https://rominf.fedorapeople.org/python-janus-1.0.0-1.fc37.src.rpm
Description: Mixed sync-async queue, supposed to be used for communicating between classic synchronous (threaded) code and asynchronous (in terms of asyncio) one. Like Janus god the queue object from the library has two faces: synchronous and asynchronous interface. Synchronous is fully compatible with standard queue, asynchronous one follows asyncio queue design.
Fedora Account System Username: rominf

Comment 1 Paul Wouters 2022-08-11 17:14:05 UTC
Please add a %license LICENSE line to the spec file. Currently, the
license is not part of the rpm. With that change, the packet is
APPROVED.


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.
[!]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
     license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
     license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "Unknown or generated", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0",
     "*No copyright* Apache License". 18 files have unknown license.
     Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/paul.wouters/2115797-python-
     janus/licensecheck.txt
[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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10240 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 must own all directories that it creates.
[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 must not depend on deprecated() packages.
[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:
[-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build
     process.
[-]: 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:
[-]: 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).
[x]: Package functions as described.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
     Note: gpgverify is not used.
[x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
     architectures.
[x]: %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
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


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


Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/aio-libs/janus/archive/v1.0.0/janus-1.0.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 7795be8173faf473bbf0139e398bd0756b24e0f3fa3f11db729efc23f9032cfb
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 7795be8173faf473bbf0139e398bd0756b24e0f3fa3f11db729efc23f9032cfb


Requires
--------
python3-janus (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.11dist(typing-extensions)



Provides
--------
python3-janus:
    python-janus
    python3-janus
    python3.11-janus
    python3.11dist(janus)
    python3dist(janus)



Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2115797
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: PHP, Perl, C/C++, fonts, R, Haskell, Ocaml, SugarActivity, Java
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 2 Roman Inflianskas 2022-08-12 11:37:16 UTC
I've fixed it other way. Please have a look. I didn't use patch, because it was easier to use sed here (and it won't break even if I forget to remove this line after upstream fixes). 

Spec URL: https://rominf.fedorapeople.org/python-janus.spec
SRPM URL: https://rominf.fedorapeople.org/python-janus-1.0.0-2.fc38.src.rpm

Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2022-09-01 17:06:05 UTC
FEDORA-2022-49512186f1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-49512186f1

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2022-09-01 17:12:10 UTC
FEDORA-2022-ad0b20b6be has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ad0b20b6be

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2022-09-01 17:19:14 UTC
FEDORA-2022-ee93b6bf4a has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ee93b6bf4a

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2022-09-02 08:27:30 UTC
FEDORA-2022-49512186f1 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-49512186f1 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-49512186f1

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2022-09-02 09:43:33 UTC
FEDORA-2022-ad0b20b6be has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-ad0b20b6be \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ad0b20b6be

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2022-09-02 10:44:26 UTC
FEDORA-2022-ee93b6bf4a has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-ee93b6bf4a \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-ee93b6bf4a

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2022-09-09 11:22:27 UTC
FEDORA-2022-ad0b20b6be has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-09-10 19:53:46 UTC
FEDORA-2022-ee93b6bf4a has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-09-12 17:44:26 UTC
FEDORA-2022-49512186f1 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.