Spec URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-rows.spec SRPM URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-rows-0.1.1-1.fc22.src.rpm Description: A common, beautiful interface to tabular data, no matter the format Fedora Account System Username: williamjmorenor Rawhide build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11256897
William, thanks for creating this spec! I'd like to add a comment about the package: in Debian there is a source package (rows) and two binary packages (python-rows and rows). I think this differentiation is very good because: 1- If somebody uses rows as a library on a software, just need to install the "python-rows" binary package (the Python library) or set it as a dependency; 2- If somebody wants to use the rows' command-line interface, just need to install the "rows" binary package (it has "python-rows" as its dependencies, but also other dependencies exclusive to the CLI feature, like "python-click" and "python-requests"). In the first case libraries such as "python-click" and "python-requests" are not needed because the user will not use it from the command-line, so we have a little optimization in its use/installation.
It is a Debian practice to split packages, looking at the Debian Package rows recomends python-rows and python-rows recomends rows. https://packages.debian.org/sid/rows https://packages.debian.org/sid/python-rows It is curios than the python-rows package in Debian requires python-requests and python-click if you say than this libraries are only for command line usage, any way a user will need to add a --no-install-recommends options to apt-get install to not install only the python-rows package without rows and python-lxml python-xlrd python-xlwt. I can include a python-rows-libs subpackage with the python library without any run time depency but not make sence for me to split a small package like this one, so for me this should work fine: Name: python-rows Provides: rows PythonProvides: python2-rows Recomends: python-lxml python-xlrd python-xlwt Requires: python-unicodecsv python-click python-requests The problem is that dnf do not support --no-recomends at the moment :( https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:WeakDependencies For future dnf releases I hope dnf install rows --no-recomends will allow users to install only the library without the run time dependencies, this will have the same effect than dnf install python-rows or python2-rows, some in the futute the python-rows package will redirect to python3-rows so have Python3 support will be good. Maybe the reviewer of this package can give some feedback about these.
python-rows should not depend on python-click and python-requests (only rows should depend on it). It is a bug on the Debian package and the maintainer is working on it with its "sponsor" (the Debian Developer who accept the package).
Spec URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows.spec SRPM URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows-0.1.1-2.fc22.src.rpm ===== Rename to rows Include a python2-rows subpackage Fix Requires following upstream recomends
I do not see the need to split the package either. The only package that would use the Python module as a library would be the rows command line tool, so creating a new package just complicates things. That's the Debian way of doing it, but we are not Debian.
(In reply to Eduardo Mayorga from comment #5) > I do not see the need to split the package either. The only package that > would use the Python module as a library would be the rows command line > tool, so creating a new package just complicates things. That's the Debian > way of doing it, but we are not Debian. This is the olny issue than you found in the spec? Or there is any other point than still need some work?
- You can use git tags to retrieve a tarball named %{name}-%{version}.tar.gz. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL?rd=Packaging/SourceURL#Git_Tags - E-V-R is missing in the the first entry of the changelog. Please join back the module and the CLI tool in one package and I'll run another review.
williamjmorenor's scratch build of rows-0.1.1-3.fc24.src.rpm for rawhide failed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11617900
Spec URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/python-rows.spec SRPM URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows-0.1.1-3.fc24.src.rpm Changelog: - From review: Drop subpackage - Include manpage
williamjmorenor's scratch build of rows-0.1.1-3.fc24.src.rpm for rawhide completed http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11617929
Spec URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows.spec SRPM URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows-0.1.1-3.fc24.src.rpm Changelog: - From review: Drop subpackage - Include manpage
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - If you build for a single python runtime you must add %python_provide python-$module so that the current default python is provided from the unversioned python package. ===== 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". 34 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/mayorga/reviews/rows/review-rows/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 3 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 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]: 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]: 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. [-]: 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: [-]: 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). [?]: 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. [-]: %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]: 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: rows-0.1.1-3.fc24.noarch.rpm rows-0.1.1-3.fc24.src.rpm rows.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unicode -> Unicode, uni code, uni-code rows.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US unicode -> Unicode, uni code, uni-code 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- rows (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python2 python(abi) python-click python-lxml python-requests python-unicodecsv python-xlrd python-xlwt Provides -------- rows: rows Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/turicas/rows/archive/v0.1.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 908acdf95ff67e43fafcc45ce0dc48764534dab74bcd15cc497139359ab30009 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 908acdf95ff67e43fafcc45ce0dc48764534dab74bcd15cc497139359ab30009
Spec URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows.spec SRPM URL: https://williamjmorenor.fedorapeople.org/rpmdev/rows-0.1.1-4.fc24.src.rpm ----- Add python-provides macros
- I missed this: since this package provides a Python module, it should be named python-rows, even if it provides a command-line tool. - Drop Provides: python2-%{name} == %{version}-%{release}. It is not necessary at all as we are now using %python_provides. Please address these before importing. PACKAGE APPROVED
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-rows