Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/master/python-marathon.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/raw/master/python-marathon-0.8.6-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Python client library/interface to the Mesos Marathon REST API. Koji scratch build available at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16090139
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/master/python-marathon.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/raw/master/python-marathon-0.8.6-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Python client library/interface to the Mesos Marathon REST API. Koji scratch build available at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16090283
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/master/python-marathon.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/raw/master/python-marathon-0.8.6-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Python client library/interface to the Mesos Marathon REST API. Koji scratch build available at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16090465
Hello David, Thanks for submitting the review. Below is the few comments: [1.] Please also include python-six, python-sseclient (Which is not packaged yet in fedora) as a Requires as they are required by python-marathon. For more info check this: https://paste.fedoraproject.org/453831/70149814/ [2.] for LICENSE and README.md file Sources, please submit a patch upstream and put the link in the spec file. Rest looks ok to me on a first glance. Thanks, Chandan Kumar
Hello David, After doing git grep sseclient and six, found that sseclient and six is not required but due to present under install_requires in setup.py https://github.com/thefactory/marathon-python/blob/master/setup.py#L16 and they will remove in a new release : https://github.com/thefactory/marathon-python/pull/143 Sorry for the noise, I will post my final review. Thanks, Chandan Kumar
@Chandan, yes, I did notice the setup.py had extra requirements that were not expressed in requirements.txt but it looked to me like they were not used. Thanks for confirming. I'm not sure what you mean for the LICENSE and README.md file ?
Also, worth mentioning that I've toyed with the idea around also packaging tests and docs but they are not included in the release tarball.
The package looks good. APPROVED. 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: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 21 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/chandankumar/killbox/python/packaging/pkgreview/1385105-python- marathon/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 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: 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: [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-marathon , python3-marathon [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. [-]: %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-marathon-0.8.6-1.fc24.noarch.rpm python3-marathon-0.8.6-1.fc24.noarch.rpm python-marathon-0.8.6-1.fc24.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 -------- python3-marathon (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-requests python2-marathon (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python-requests Provides -------- python3-marathon: python3-marathon python2-marathon: python-marathon python2-marathon Source checksums ---------------- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/thefactory/marathon-python/0.8.6/README.md : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 93ad43107040faa287b15b516d3577d649a471d43ad86239563b548d34d2b68f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 93ad43107040faa287b15b516d3577d649a471d43ad86239563b548d34d2b68f https://pypi.io/packages/source/m/marathon/marathon-0.8.6.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : d02964b02070d3aad2fbe8924e3962ad2d4f027aafc59952dc5283c140da96fb CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : d02964b02070d3aad2fbe8924e3962ad2d4f027aafc59952dc5283c140da96fb https://raw.githubusercontent.com/thefactory/marathon-python/0.8.6/LICENSE : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b27920116a25da2936d3168504a344112439ceb12861fb8016481f41f3670721 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b27920116a25da2936d3168504a344112439ceb12861fb8016481f41f3670721 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1385105 Buildroot used: fedora-24-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
Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/master/python-marathon.spec SRPM URL: https://github.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/raw/master/python-marathon-0.8.7-1.fc24.src.rpm Description: Python client library/interface to the Mesos Marathon REST API. Koji scratch build available at http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=16261092 In this most recent iteration ( https://github.com/dmsimard/python-marathon-distgit/commit/a4e8daa716b7bc47c75ab11e30e8ee91c74dc650 ) I've updated the version to 0.8.7 and also addressed concerns about packaging the license even though it was not in the source tarball.
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python-marathon
Built in rawhide.