Bug 1370644 (python-django-picklefield) - Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
Summary: Review Request: python-django-picklefield - A pickled object field for Django
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: python-django-picklefield
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Arthur Mello
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1435876 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-08-26 21:02 UTC by Igor Gnatenko
Modified: 2017-10-13 21:20 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-10-09 19:58:26 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
amello: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Bugzilla 1435876 0 medium CLOSED Review Request: python-django-picklefield - Pickled object field for Django 2021-02-22 00:41:40 UTC

Internal Links: 1435876

Description Igor Gnatenko 2016-08-26 21:02:02 UTC
Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-django-picklefield.spec
SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-django-picklefield-0.3.2-1.fc26.src.rpm
Description: A pickled object field for Django.
Fedora Account System Username: ignatenkobrain

Comment 1 Arthur Mello 2017-06-22 13:46:08 UTC
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


Issues:
=======
- Package does not use a name that already exists.
  Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-django-picklefield
  See:
  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Package_Names


===== 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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 10 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck attached.
[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.
[x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[x]: 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).
[!]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[!]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: 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.
[x]: 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 20480 bytes in 2 files.
[!]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
     // Please, check the issue with packaging name conflicting with an
     // existing one
[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 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).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python2
     -django-picklefield , python3-django-picklefield
[x]: 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.
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python2-django-picklefield-0.3.2-1.fc25.noarch.rpm
          python3-django-picklefield-0.3.2-1.fc25.noarch.rpm
          python-django-picklefield-0.3.2-1.fc25.src.rpm
python2-django-picklefield.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/picklefield/models.py
python3-django-picklefield.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/picklefield/models.py
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python3-django-picklefield.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python3.5/site-packages/picklefield/models.py
python2-django-picklefield.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/picklefield/models.py
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings.



Requires
--------
python3-django-picklefield (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3-django

python2-django-picklefield (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python2-django



Provides
--------
python3-django-picklefield:
    python3-django-picklefield
    python3.5dist(django-picklefield)
    python3dist(django-picklefield)

python2-django-picklefield:
    python-django-picklefield
    python2-django-picklefield
    python2.7dist(django-picklefield)
    python2dist(django-picklefield)



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/gintas/django-picklefield/archive/v0.3.2/django-picklefield-0.3.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : b10beb3d604c00845c429b3ce2485fab26b95de78e4af06e0fb76e02941afcb3
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b10beb3d604c00845c429b3ce2485fab26b95de78e4af06e0fb76e02941afcb3


LicenseCheck
----------------
MIT/X11 (BSD like)
------------------
django-picklefield-0.3.2/LICENSE
django-picklefield-0.3.2/setup.py

Unknown or generated
--------------------
django-picklefield-0.3.2/.coveragerc
django-picklefield-0.3.2/.travis.yml
django-picklefield-0.3.2/README.rst
django-picklefield-0.3.2/setup.cfg
django-picklefield-0.3.2/src/picklefield/__init__.py
django-picklefield-0.3.2/src/picklefield/compat.py
django-picklefield-0.3.2/src/picklefield/fields.py
django-picklefield-0.3.2/src/picklefield/tests.py
django-picklefield-0.3.2/test_settings.py
django-picklefield-0.3.2/tox.ini

Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -vn python-django-picklefield
Buildroot used: fedora-25-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

Comment 2 Jaroslav Škarvada 2017-06-23 08:35:13 UTC
(In reply to Arthur Mello from comment #1)
> Issues:
> =======
> - Package does not use a name that already exists.
>   Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
>   https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/python-django-picklefield
>   See:
>  
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/
> NamingGuidelines#Conflicting_Package_Names

The package was orphaned with message "upstream dead". It's currently not true, because there are upstream commits from May. Unfortunately the package was later retired, so we need to follow unretire process [1] and re-review is part of it.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers

Comment 3 Arthur Mello 2017-06-23 09:08:34 UTC
(In reply to Jaroslav Škarvada from comment #2)
> The package was orphaned with message "upstream dead". It's currently not
> true, because there are upstream commits from May. Unfortunately the package
> was later retired, so we need to follow unretire process [1] and re-review
> is part of it.
> 
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Orphaned_package_that_need_new_maintainers

Thanks Jaroslav. Since, otherwise this name issue, everything seemed fine during review, I am approving the review of this bug.

Comment 4 Neal Gompa 2017-06-23 10:52:11 UTC
Oh dear, there were *two* reviews going on in parallel for python-django-picklefield...

Comment 5 Jaroslav Škarvada 2017-06-23 11:36:29 UTC
(In reply to Neal Gompa from comment #4)
> Oh dear, there were *two* reviews going on in parallel for
> python-django-picklefield...

Thanks for info, this is unlucky. Could Igor and Aurelien agree on further steps? I.e. who will maintain it?

Comment 6 Jaroslav Škarvada 2017-06-23 11:38:29 UTC
It's worth to point out that Igor's request was filled first.

Comment 7 Aurelien Bompard 2017-06-23 12:43:43 UTC
Igor, I'm happy to co-maintain it with you, or to let you maintain it if you prefer. It's only a dependency for me, so I'm not directly interested in it.

Comment 8 Igor Gnatenko 2017-07-22 10:42:13 UTC
*** Bug 1435876 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 9 Igor Gnatenko 2017-07-22 10:44:45 UTC
I requested unretirement of package in PkgDB, somehow mrunge was admin there..... So I will add you as co-maintainer once it is unretired.

Comment 10 Igor Gnatenko 2017-09-30 12:27:48 UTC
I have an issue with getting it built... https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7081

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2017-10-02 16:11:26 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc26 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 26. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-deec65f397

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2017-10-02 16:11:37 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-827ef4a457

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2017-10-02 16:11:44 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc27 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 27. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2017-22a27289b4

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2017-10-06 03:22:07 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.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-2017-827ef4a457

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2017-10-06 03:24:20 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.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-deec65f397

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2017-10-06 04:24:28 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 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-2017-22a27289b4

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2017-10-09 19:58:26 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc27 has been pushed to the Fedora 27 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2017-10-13 17:20:55 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc26 has been pushed to the Fedora 26 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2017-10-13 21:20:44 UTC
python-django-picklefield-1.0.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.


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