Spec URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-coverage_pth.spec SRPM URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-1.fc23.src.rpm Description: A .pth file to site-packages to enable coverage.py. Fedora Account System Username: churchyard
License file is missing in the tarball, here is an attempt to fix that: https://github.com/dougn/coverage_pth/pull/4
License should be included. Built and tested, works fine.
Spec URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-coverage_pth.spec SRPM URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc23.src.rpm Included the license from upstream github repository.
Everything seems good.
Posting also the output of fedora-review ===== 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. [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages, /usr/lib/python3.5 [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.5/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.5 [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 [ ]: 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. [ ]: 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 %license. [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. [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: [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 python2-coverage_pth , python3-coverage_pth [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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %check is present and all tests pass. [ ]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc25.noarch.rpm python3-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc25.noarch.rpm python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc25.src.rpm python2-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualenv -> virtual python2-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pth -> pt, pith, path python2-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y python3-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualenv -> virtual python3-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pth -> pt, pith, path python3-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y python-coverage_pth.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualenv -> virtual python-coverage_pth.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pth -> pt, pith, path python-coverage_pth.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- python2-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualenv -> virtual python2-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pth -> pt, pith, path python2-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y python3-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) virtualenv -> virtual python3-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US pth -> pt, pith, path python3-coverage_pth.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US py -> pt, p, y 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Requires -------- python2-coverage_pth (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python2-coverage python3-coverage_pth (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python3-coverage Provides -------- python2-coverage_pth: python-coverage_pth python2-coverage_pth python3-coverage_pth: python3-coverage_pth Source checksums ---------------- https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/c/coverage_pth/coverage_pth-0.0.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6f4caa5ded77dcb3ee637034b8ee6e7b3851734d3588f1b214107ef07a769580 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6f4caa5ded77dcb3ee637034b8ee6e7b3851734d3588f1b214107ef07a769580 https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dougn/coverage_pth/master/LICENSE.txt : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ea2b2caf54a2f03d91b9fa851b323d61d3934ce6859cfa89f7d0ae3424cc4291 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ea2b2caf54a2f03d91b9fa851b323d61d3934ce6859cfa89f7d0ae3424cc4291 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.0 (3c5c9d7) last change: 2015-05-20 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1317131 --mock-config 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, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
What about the empty [ ] items?
Not applied here
OK, thanks for the review.
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-coverage_pth
python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-7fbd5e8fd0
python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-1ea4c96a56
python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 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-2016-1ea4c96a56
python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 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-2016-7fbd5e8fd0
python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
python-coverage_pth-0.0.1-2.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.