Spec URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq-1.1-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: GitHub notification alike app for Django, derived from django-activity-stream. Fedora Account System Username: suanand Koji Builds: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15200380 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15200345
- From what I see in setup.py and LICENSE file, the license is BSD, not MIT - Requires are missing: please add them (see setup.py) - Usage of the %{sum} macro is not needed. Define the first Summary normally then use %{summary} - Please add a %check section and launch tests in it - Please update to 1.2 Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Unknown or generated". 21 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /tmp/1365839-python-django-notifications- hq/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. [!]: 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 61440 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 %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. [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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2 -django-notifications-hq , python3-django-notifications-hq [?]: Package functions as described. [!]: 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. [?]: 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]: 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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-django-notifications-hq-1.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python3-django-notifications-hq-1.1-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python-django-notifications-hq-1.1-1.fc26.src.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- python2-django-notifications-hq (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-django-notifications-hq (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python2-django-notifications-hq: python-django-notifications-hq python2-django-notifications-hq python2.7dist(django-notifications-hq) python2dist(django-notifications-hq) python3-django-notifications-hq: python3-django-notifications-hq python3.5dist(django-notifications-hq) python3dist(django-notifications-hq) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/django-notifications/django-notifications/archive/1.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f84ff1af1b70abfeefb1b8da2256d70b40fe7c98ebed70f73ac538b4e013fad6 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f84ff1af1b70abfeefb1b8da2256d70b40fe7c98ebed70f73ac538b4e013fad6 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1365839 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6
Thanks for the review. Updated package: SPEC URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq-1.2-1.fc24.src.rpm Builds: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16105318 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16105327
I still have a problem with the requires. The list is: - 'django>=1.7', - 'django-model-utils>=2.0.3', - 'jsonfield>=1.0.3', - 'pytz' But you only included django and pytz. In addition, from what I see in the repos, django is called python2-django or python3-django. Furthermore, I think the requires must go into the proper package (ie python2 deps in the python2 package and python3 deps in the python3 package). Otherwise, the requirements will not be good. Can you also launch the included tests or tell my why it's better not to launch them (unreliable for instance)?
Thanks for the review. Updated package: SPEC URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq-1.2-1.fc24.src.rpm Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16551032
- Can you launch the tests on python 3 too ? I also think that since you may not be packaging python 2 depending on the system, you should guard the python 2 tests with the %if 0%{?with_python2} macros. - The lists of requires are good. However, they are not in the proper package. If you look at the output of fedora-review or rpm -qp --requires PACKAGE you will see: python2-django-notifications-hq (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-django-notifications-hq (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) For them to be correct, you must declare them like this: %if 0%{?with_python2} %package -n python2-%{pypi_name} Requires: python2-django Requires: pytz Requires: python2-django-model-utils Requires: python2-django-jsonfield Summary: %{summary} %{?python_provide:%python_provide python2-%{pypi_name}} %description -n python2-%{pypi_name} GitHub notification alike app for Django, derived from django-activity-stream. %endif
Thank you for pointing this! Have corrected and updated package: SPEC URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq.spec SRPM URL: https://bitbucket.org/sundeep_co_in/python-pkgs/downloads/python-django-notifications-hq-1.2-1.fc24.src.rpm Build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16558924 - getting some errors in py3 tests: django.core.exceptions.ImproperlyConfigured: Requested setting AUTH_USER_MODEL, but settings are not configured. You must either define the environment variable DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE or call settings.configure() before accessing settings. - initially intended to package for epel7 also, but some dependencies are not packaged for epel7 so, may be for fedora only. Thanks
Looks good. Approved.
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-django-notifications-hq
python-django-notifications-hq-1.2-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-cbdd135f0a
python-django-notifications-hq-1.2-1.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-2016-cbdd135f0a
python-django-notifications-hq-1.2-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.