Bug 1147743 - Review Request: python-nose-cov - nose plugin for coverage reporting
Summary: Review Request: python-nose-cov - nose plugin for coverage reporting
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Haïkel Guémar
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-09-30 02:01 UTC by Mairi Dulaney
Modified: 2015-02-21 01:37 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-02-21 01:37:31 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
karlthered: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Mairi Dulaney 2014-09-30 02:01:01 UTC
Spec URL: https://jdulaney.fedorapeople.org/nose-cov.spec
SRPM URL: https://jdulaney.fedorapeople.org/nose-cov-1.6-1.src.rpm
Description: nose plugin for python coverage reporting
Fedora Account System Username:  jdulaney

Comment 1 Mairi Dulaney 2014-09-30 02:35:43 UTC
Successfull Koji build:  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=7725558

Comment 3 Haïkel Guémar 2014-09-30 10:21:39 UTC
* You don't need to define version and release macros, they are defined for you by RPM.
* Drop the Buildroot, prefix, group and vendor fields
* use %{python2_sitelib} macro instead of %{_usr}/lib/python2.7/site-packages/
and %{__python2} to call the python interpreter
* drop the %defattr in %files and %clean, no more required for Fedora or EL6+
* I suggest that you create a macro pypi_name to store upstream name and use it appropriately
%global pypi_name nose-cov
* It's a matter of style but I would put the Summary field below Name and Version. It's nicer for people reading spec files.
* If your spec is based on an existing package, please mention it in the changelog

Comment 4 Mairi Dulaney 2014-09-30 22:31:26 UTC
rpmlint:

jdulaney@gefjon:~/rpmbuild/SPECS$ rpmlint ./libason.spec ../RPMS/x86_64/libason-0.1.1-1.fc21.x86_64.rpm ../SRPMS/libason-0.1.1-1.fc21.src.rpm libason.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US programmatically -> pro grammatically, pro-grammatically, programmatic ally
libason.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US programmatically -> pro grammatically, pro-grammatically, programmatic ally
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

Get the license installed via %doc and you'll be good.

Comment 5 Mairi Dulaney 2014-09-30 22:58:51 UTC
Sorry, wrong bz.

In other news, I've done the suggestions and so am ready to continue.

Comment 6 Haïkel Guémar 2014-10-02 09:04:28 UTC
Still few missing things (last ones, I promise):
* Release tag must be set to 1%{?dist}
* you need to clean up the bundled egg info in %prep section
rm -rf nose_cov.egg-info

All the other points are valid

Comment 8 Stephen Gallagher 2014-10-02 19:17:10 UTC
Small note: I recommend replacing the %files section with the following:

%files 
%doc README.txt
%doc LICENSE.txt
%{python2_sitelib}/nose_cov*.egg-info
%{python2_sitelib}/nose_cov.py*


This will make it easier to rebase later, since you won't need to edit the files content now unless the set of installed python files changes (not just for version number changes).


This is obviously non-blocking, but helpful for maintenance.

Comment 9 Mairi Dulaney 2014-10-03 08:13:49 UTC
Done.

Comment 10 Haïkel Guémar 2014-10-05 16:12:16 UTC
Since this package complies with Fedora packaging guidelines,
I hereby approve it into Fedora Packages collection



Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[x] = 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/haikel/1147743-python-nose-cov/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 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]: 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 %doc.
[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]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[-]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
     work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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]: 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.
[x]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
[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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[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: python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc22.noarch.rpm
          python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc22.src.rpm
python-nose-cov.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) subprocesses -> sub processes, sub-processes, processes
python-nose-cov.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C nose plugin for coverage reporting, including subprocesses and multiprocessing
python-nose-cov.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US subprocesses -> sub processes, sub-processes, processes
python-nose-cov.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) subprocesses -> sub processes, sub-processes, processes
python-nose-cov.src: W: summary-not-capitalized C nose plugin for coverage reporting, including subprocesses and multiprocessing
python-nose-cov.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US subprocesses -> sub processes, sub-processes, processes
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
# rpmlint python-nose-cov
python-nose-cov.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) subprocesses -> sub processes, sub-processes, processes
python-nose-cov.noarch: W: summary-not-capitalized C nose plugin for coverage reporting, including subprocesses and multiprocessing
python-nose-cov.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US subprocesses -> sub processes, sub-processes, processes
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
# echo 'rpmlint-done:'



Requires
--------
python-nose-cov (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python-cov-core
    python-nose



Provides
--------
python-nose-cov:
    python-nose-cov



Source checksums
----------------
https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/n/nose-cov/nose-cov-1.6.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 8bec0335598f1cc69e3262cc50d7678c1a6010fa44625ce343c4ec1500774412
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 8bec0335598f1cc69e3262cc50d7678c1a6010fa44625ce343c4ec1500774412


Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1147743 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL5, BATCH, DISTTAG

Comment 11 Mairi Dulaney 2014-10-05 19:01:54 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: python-nose-cov
Short Description: nose plugin for coverage reporting
Upstream URL: http://bitbucket.org/memedough/nose-cov/overview
Owners: jdulaney
Branches: f19 f20 f21
InitialCC:

Comment 12 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-10-06 12:28:34 UTC
WARNING: Requested package name python-nose-cov doesn't match bug summary
nose-cov, please correct.

Comment 13 Mairi Dulaney 2014-10-06 16:22:43 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: python-nose-cov
Short Description: nose plugin for coverage reporting
Upstream URL: http://bitbucket.org/memedough/nose-cov/overview
Owners: jdulaney
Branches: f19 f20 f21
InitialCC:

Comment 14 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-10-06 18:40:20 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2014-10-06 20:15:41 UTC
python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc19 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 19.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc19

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2014-10-06 20:16:33 UTC
python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc20 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 20.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc20

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2014-10-08 19:04:25 UTC
python-nose-cov-1.6-1.fc19 has been pushed to the Fedora 19 testing repository.

Comment 18 Mairi Dulaney 2015-02-21 01:37:31 UTC
Stable


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.