Bug 1179346 - Review Request: python-pytest-sourceorder - Test-ordering plugin for pytest
Summary: Review Request: python-pytest-sourceorder - Test-ordering plugin for pytest
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Stephen Gallagher
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2015-01-06 15:09 UTC by Petr Viktorin
Modified: 2015-02-13 02:23 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version: python-pytest-sourceorder-0.4-2.fc21
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-01-28 16:48:36 UTC
Type: ---
sgallagh: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Petr Viktorin 2015-01-06 15:09:59 UTC
Spec URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-pytest-sourceorder.git/plain/python-pytest-sourceorder.spec?id=7e27215ebd65f64f2085e6199a8a62a7341e5aac
SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~pviktori/srpms/python-pytest-sourceorder-0.1-1.fc21.src.rpm
COPR: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-plugins/
Fedora Account System Username: pviktori
Description: <description here>
Allows tests within a specially marked class to be run in source order,
instead of the "almost alphabetical" order Pytest normally uses.

Comment 2 Stephen Gallagher 2015-01-26 18:29:20 UTC
Same comment as on BZ #1179336: you only changed the %license on the python 3 version.

Comment 4 Stephen Gallagher 2015-01-27 14:28:19 UTC
Review approved.

Package Review

[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

- Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in
  the spec URL.
  Note: Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /dev/shm/1179346-python-
  See: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/SourceURL
- 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.
  Note: Cannot find COPYING in rpm(s)

===== MUST items =====

[X]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[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". 6 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /dev/shm/1179346-python-pytest-
[X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[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]: 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.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
[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]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

[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 =====

[-]: 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
[?]: 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
[X]: %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
[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 =====

[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.

Checking: python-pytest-sourceorder-0.4-2.fc22.noarch.rpm
python-pytest-sourceorder.src: W: file-size-mismatch pytest-sourceorder-0.4.tar.gz = 16813, https://github.com/encukou/pytest-sourceorder/archive/v0.4.tar.gz#/pytest-sourceorder-0.4.tar.gz = 16796
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.

Comment 5 Petr Viktorin 2015-01-28 12:09:36 UTC
New Package SCM Request
Package Name: python-pytest-sourceorder
Short Description: Test-ordering plugin for pytest
Upstream URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-pytest-sourceorder.git
Owners: pviktori
Branches: f22 f21

Comment 6 Gwyn Ciesla 2015-01-28 12:57:28 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2015-01-28 15:40:12 UTC
python-pytest-sourceorder-0.4-2.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.

Comment 8 Petr Viktorin 2015-01-28 16:48:36 UTC
Thanks for the review, and for the repo creation!

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2015-02-13 02:23:06 UTC
python-pytest-sourceorder-0.4-2.fc21 has been pushed to the Fedora 21 stable repository.

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