Spec URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-pytest-beakerlib.git/plain/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~pviktori/srpms/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.3-1.fc21.src.rpm COPR: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-plugins/ Fedora Account System Username: pviktori Description: Allows results of running a test suite under pytest to be reported to an active BeakerLib session.
Greetings, Please note this is Un-official review. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======== ! %check is present and all tests pass. ===== 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: "GPL (v3 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 2 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/makerpm/review/1179350 -python-pytest-beakerlib/licensecheck.txt [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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 102400 bytes in 6 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: No rpmlint messages. [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. [x]: 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. [?]: 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: [x]: 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 -pytest-beakerlib [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [-]: 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. [-]: 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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python-pytest-beakerlib-0.3-1.fc22.noarch.rpm python3-pytest-beakerlib-0.3-1.fc22.noarch.rpm python-pytest-beakerlib-0.3-1.fc22.src.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ^[]0;<mock-chroot>^G<mock-chroot>[root@pki1 /]# rpmlint python3-pytest-beakerlib python-pytest-beakerlib 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. ^[]0;<mock-chroot>^G<mock-chroot>[root@pki1 /]# echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- python3-pytest-beakerlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3 python3-pytest python-pytest-beakerlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): pytest python python(abi) Provides -------- python3-pytest-beakerlib: python3-pytest-beakerlib python-pytest-beakerlib: python-pytest-beakerlib Source checksums ---------------- https://fedorahosted.org/released/python-pytest-beakerlib/pytest-beakerlib-0.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ec40c2364bbc6b6ebe4691ae066a3e3f0367e69d984ea7d3a59d71666bc9a803 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ec40c2364bbc6b6ebe4691ae066a3e3f0367e69d984ea7d3a59d71666bc9a803 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.2 (63c24cb) last change: 2014-07-14 Command line :/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1179350 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 Some minor issues: ================== In the spec file, you have multiple %doc lines, i think you could have one %doc including all the files that should be in %doc %doc COPYING readme.rst test_demo.py In the %install section, for python3 section %{python3_sitelib} is used, but for python2 section %{python_sitelib} is used instead of %{python2_sitelib} , Also test_demo.py doesn't contain license header information. Refer: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python
Thanks for the review! With separate %doc the diffs are prettier, so I'd like to leave that as it is. For python2_sitelib and the copyright notice, I made a new release, 0.4-2: Spec URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-pytest-beakerlib.git/plain/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~pviktori/srpms/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.4-2.fc21.src.rpm COPR: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-plugins/
Updated with comments from a similar request, #1179336 Spec URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-pytest-multihost.git/plain/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~pviktori/srpms/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.5-1.fc21.src.rpm COPR: https://copr.fedoraproject.org/coprs/pviktori/pytest-plugins/
Oops, forgot to change to %license for both Pythons Spec URL: https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/python-pytest-beakerlib.git/plain/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://fedorapeople.org/~pviktori/srpms/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.5-2.fc21.src.rpm
Hi Petr, I have reviewed the spec file and have a couple of items to point out: * The build fails with: RPM build errors: error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/__pycache__/pytest_beakerlib.cpython-35.opt-1.pyc Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/__pycache__/pytest_beakerlib.cpython-35.opt-1.pyc Please see Koji scratch build [0] for more details. * Smoke test is not being run: /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.Xy53Yw: line 33: smoketest.sh: command not found Besides, ${__python2} should probably be a macro in: PYTHON=${__python2} smoketest.sh PYTHON=${__python3} smoketest.sh * Please investigate the following error during byte compilation: + xargs -0 /usr/bin/python2 -O -c 'import py_compile, sys; [py_compile.compile(f, dfile=f.partition("$RPM_BUILD_ROOT")[2]], optimize=opt) for opt in range(2) for f in sys.argv[1:]]' find: '/builddir/build/BUILDROOT/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.5-2.fc24.x86_64/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pytest-beakerlib': No such file or directory File "<string>", line 1 import py_compile, sys; [py_compile.compile(f, dfile=f.partition("$RPM_BUILD_ROOT")[2]], optimize=opt) for opt in range(2) for f in sys.argv[1:]] ^ SyntaxError: invalid syntax * There should be a python2-pytest-beakerlib subpackage which would provide python-pytest-beakerlib and python2-pytest-beakerlib. * The provided URL says that the project has moved to https://pagure.io/python-pytest-beakerlib, so you might consider using it instead. * Why would you have `Requires: python` and `Requires: python3` for the packages? * Please consider using %{summary} macro in the subpackage. [0] http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16616285
Taking over this review request. Updated spec file and srpm: Spec URL: https://pagure.io/fork/ishcherb/python-pytest-beakerlib/raw/master/f/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://ishcherb.fedorapeople.org/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7-1.fc25.src.rpm Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=17918135
Thanks! Don't forget to un-assign yourself from the request, though.
Right, thanks for reminding!
Is EPEL5 supposed to be supported?
I believe that Petr told me that it is supposed to be supported, but it was a month ago, so I might be wrong. Petr?
> %if 0%{?with_python3} > BuildRequires: rpm-python3 > %endif Does it not need rpm-python for Python 2? You can define %license on platforms without it on the top instead of if/else do %license/%doc. %{!?_licensedir:%global license %%doc} From my Fedora POV, I'd rather see the %py3_install macros etc., but I see why that's not possible. Otherwise this looks good from the first glance, will do a mock build on rawhide and epels and a formal review tmrw.
Created attachment 1263691 [details] mock build.log Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - The source URL is bad, fedorahosted is not working any more. Update to https://releases.pagure.org/python-pytest-beakerlib/... (The 0.7 release is missing from there BTW) Or us PyPI. - The test has this in the log: :: [ 14:18:10 ] :: [ WARNING ] :: Please fix your test to have /bin/bash shebang Maybe run it with bash instead of sh? - There are failures in the smoketest output, is that intentional? build.log attached. ===== 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. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [ ]: 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 6 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 %license. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [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]: 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]: 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 [-]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. [?]: 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. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: 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: python2-pytest-beakerlib-0.7-1.fc27.noarch.rpm python3-pytest-beakerlib-0.7-1.fc27.noarch.rpm python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7-1.fc27.src.rpm python2-pytest-beakerlib.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://pagure.io/python-pytest-beakerlib The read operation timed out python3-pytest-beakerlib.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://pagure.io/python-pytest-beakerlib The read operation timed out python-pytest-beakerlib.src: W: invalid-url URL: https://pagure.io/python-pytest-beakerlib The read operation timed out python-pytest-beakerlib.src: W: file-size-mismatch pytest-beakerlib-0.7.tar.gz = 18192, https://fedorahosted.org/released/python-pytest-beakerlib/pytest-beakerlib-0.7.tar.gz = 22929 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. The pagure.io URL is fine. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python3-pytest-beakerlib.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://pagure.io/python-pytest-beakerlib <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> python2-pytest-beakerlib.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://pagure.io/python-pytest-beakerlib <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. The pagure.io URL is fine. Requires -------- python3-pytest-beakerlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-pytest python2-pytest-beakerlib (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): pytest python(abi) Provides -------- python3-pytest-beakerlib: python3-pytest-beakerlib python3.6dist(pytest-beakerlib) python3dist(pytest-beakerlib) python2-pytest-beakerlib: python-pytest-beakerlib python2-pytest-beakerlib python2.7dist(pytest-beakerlib) python2dist(pytest-beakerlib) Source checksums ---------------- https://fedorahosted.org/released/python-pytest-beakerlib/pytest-beakerlib-0.7.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f14c1a816ee47808c7717ccec336035919a245d899372d7ecc060aca1fc77d33 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e05e77eb85d1d496f882de65bafcd7a1cbecf11df2828d5595cbd4e3619798d0
Thanks a lot for the review, Miro. I will make it Fedora only as per previous comments and will fix all the issues. (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #16) > > - There are failures in the smoketest output, is that intentional? It is. It's a demo for running both success and failure tests with beakerlib plugin enabled. But I will add a comment for that.
> Does it not need rpm-python for Python 2? Good catch, it does not actually require rpm-python at all, after https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185866 was fixed. > - The source URL is bad, fedorahosted is not working any more. > Update to https://releases.pagure.org/python-pytest-beakerlib/... > (The 0.7 release is missing from there BTW) > Or us PyPI. Fixed. > - The test has this in the log: > > :: [ 14:18:10 ] :: [ WARNING ] :: Please fix your test to have /bin/bash > shebang > > Maybe run it with bash instead of sh? Running tests with bash. The changes to the spec file are available here: https://pagure.io/fork/ishcherb/python-pytest-beakerlib/c/65836270c43200dae3990f9c6ed2c0fd1c8cd478?branch=master Spec URL: https://pagure.io/fork/ishcherb/python-pytest-beakerlib/raw/master/f/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://ishcherb.fedorapeople.org/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc25.src.rpm Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18488824
Spec URL: https://pagure.io/fork/ishcherb/python-pytest-beakerlib/raw/master/f/python-pytest-beakerlib.spec SRPM URL: https://ishcherb.fedorapeople.org/python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc25.src.rpm Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=18504948 Note that, if building the package for EPEL 6, the tests fail, as the pytest-beakerlib plugin does not work with Python 2.6 and pytest 2.3.5. After talking to Petr, we decided to leave it as is, unless someone requests Python 2.6 compatibility.
Source checksums ---------------- https://releases.pagure.org/python-pytest-beakerlib/pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 59542d801b48d93decb147312a8a2d1189c64fd53350bd1c3abd6cf740444708 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 59542d801b48d93decb147312a8a2d1189c64fd53350bd1c3abd6cf740444708 Package APPROVED.
Thank you for the review.
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-pytest-beakerlib
python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-de22a03227
python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-c6188d5407
python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 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-2017-c6188d5407
python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 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-2017-de22a03227
python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-pytest-beakerlib-0.7.1-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.