Bug 1379421 (python-psycogreen) - Review Request: python-psycogreen - Psycopg2 integration with co-routine libraries
Summary: Review Request: python-psycogreen - Psycopg2 integration with co-routine libr...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: python-psycogreen
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Christian Dersch
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: odoo
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-09-26 16:45 UTC by Björn Esser (besser82)
Modified: 2016-10-23 17:47 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-10-23 17:47:22 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
lupinix.fedora: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Björn Esser (besser82) 2016-09-26 16:45:55 UTC
Description:

  The psycogreen package enables psycopg2 to work with co-routine libraries,
  using asynchronous calls internally but offering a blocking interface so
  that regular code can run unmodified.  Psycopg offers co-routines support
  since release 2.2.  Because the main module is a C extension it cannot be
  monkey-patched to become co-routine-friendly.  Instead it exposes a hook
  that co-routine libraries can use to install a function integrating with
  their event scheduler.  Psycopg will call the function whenever it
  executes a libpq call that may block.  Psycogreen is a collection of “wait
  callbacks” useful to integrate Psycopg with different co-routine libraries.


Koji Build:

  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=15811888


Issues:

  no known issues, but some false positives about spelling from rpmlint.


FAS-User:

  besser82


Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/python-psycogreen.spec
  SRPM URL:  https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/python-psycogreen-1.0-0.1.fc26.src.rpm


Thanks for review in advance!

Comment 1 Igor Gnatenko 2016-09-27 10:03:57 UTC
> %package -n python2-psycogreen
why not python2-%{pypi_name} ? Same for other places.

> %autosetup -c
> %{__mv} %{pypi_name}-%{version} python2
> 
> %if %{with python3}
> %{__cp} -a python2 python3
> %endif # with python3
is it really needed? You don't patch sources, so I guess you don't need anything like this

> %{python3_sitelib}/*
'*' will own `__pycache__` directory which is probably not the best idea.

Comment 2 Björn Esser (besser82) 2016-09-27 10:17:21 UTC
Thanks for your improments, Igor!

***

Updated package

Urls:

  Spec URL:  https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/python-psycogreen.spec
  SRPM URL:  https://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/python-psycogreen-1.0-0.2.fc26.src.rpm

Comment 3 Christian Dersch 2016-09-27 19:21:49 UTC
Will review now

Comment 4 Christian Dersch 2016-09-27 19:31:08 UTC
Approved, looks fine!

@Igor: Sorry, have seen too late that you assigned. I just looked at fedora-review? flag (you did not set).


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.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses
     found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 9 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/review/1379421
     -python-psycogreen/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.
[-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 40960 bytes in 4 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.
[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).
[x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python2-psycogreen , python3-psycogreen
[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.

===> is noarch

[-]: %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-psycogreen-1.0-0.2.fc26.noarch.rpm
          python3-psycogreen-1.0-0.2.fc26.noarch.rpm
          python-psycogreen-1.0-0.2.fc26.src.rpm
python2-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Psycopg -> Psychos
python2-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpq -> lib
python3-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Psycopg -> Psychos
python3-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpq -> lib
python-psycogreen.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Psycopg -> Psychos
python-psycogreen.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpq -> lib
3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
python2-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Psycopg -> Psychos
python2-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpq -> lib
python3-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Psycopg -> Psychos
python3-psycogreen.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US libpq -> lib
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings.



Requires
--------
python2-psycogreen (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python2-eventlet
    python2-gevent
    python2-psycopg2

python3-psycogreen (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3-eventlet
    python3-gevent
    python3-psycopg2



Provides
--------
python2-psycogreen:
    python-psycogreen
    python2-psycogreen
    python2.7dist(psycogreen)
    python2dist(psycogreen)

python3-psycogreen:
    python3-psycogreen
    python3.5dist(psycogreen)
    python3dist(psycogreen)



Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/psycogreen/psycogreen-1.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 9acfa6cb5373bcf1eaf27c904d98d59c9f3bb0065cbb005f83ccc45055ace9a1
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 9acfa6cb5373bcf1eaf27c904d98d59c9f3bb0065cbb005f83ccc45055ace9a1


Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -v -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1379421
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

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2016-09-27 21:20:36 UTC
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-psycogreen

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2016-09-28 20:52:54 UTC
python-psycogreen-1.0-1.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-2016-6f3b609541

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2016-10-09 02:48:53 UTC
python-psycogreen-1.0-1.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2016-10-09 10:48:13 UTC
python-psycogreen-1.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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-EPEL-2016-6cdd913969

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2016-10-23 17:47:22 UTC
python-psycogreen-1.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 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.