Spec URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-zope-event/python3-zope-event.spec SRPM URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-zope-event/python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.el7.centos.src.rpm Description: This module is already provided by RHEL/CentOS, but only in the Python2 version. I am submitting this package, based on the main one, which only builds the Python3 version, and I'll only request the EPEL7 branch (and later EPEL versions). Here's the original description: The zope.event package provides a simple event system. It provides an event publishing system and a very simple event-dispatching system on which more sophisticated event dispatching systems can be built. (For example, a type-based event dispatching system that builds on zope.event can be found in zope.component.) Fedora Account System Username: abompard
I only found one thing we would need to fix to approve this: * fedora-review thinks that COPYRIGHT.txt should be marked as %license, even though there's also a LICENSE.txt. I personally think it might be OK as is, but it also makes some sense for copyright and license to be together so I think it would be a good thing to fix. This is an optional suggestion, so you can ignore if you want: * The package defines srcname and pkgname. It would be cleaner to just use one or the other of those two instead of both. Question for my own knowledge: * What are the python3_other macros? Are those standard macros, or are they used when doing manual builds? I've not seen them before.
> * fedora-review thinks that COPYRIGHT.txt should be marked as %license, even > though there's also a LICENSE.txt. Done, thanks. Spec URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-zope-event/python3-zope-event.spec SRPM URL: https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/reviews/python3-zope-event/python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.el7.centos.src.rpm > * The package defines srcname and pkgname. It would be cleaner to just use > one or the other of those two instead of both. It's actually not the same value, one has a dash and the other a dot. > * What are the python3_other macros? Are those standard macros, or are they > used when doing manual builds? I've not seen them before. They come from this template: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bkabrda/EPEL7_Python3 The aim is to support multiple versions of Python3 in EPEL.
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: "Unknown or generated". 81 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/rbarlow/reviews/1395244-python3-zope- event/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. Note: Dirs in package are owned also by: /usr/lib/python3.5/site- packages/zope(python3-zope-sqlalchemy, python3-zope-event, python3 -zope-exceptions) [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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 645120 bytes in 41 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]: 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). [?]: 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. [?]: 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: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.fc26.noarch.rpm python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.fc26.src.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- python3-zope-event (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python3-zope-event: python3-zope-event python3.5dist(zope.event) python3dist(zope.event) Source checksums ---------------- http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/z/zope.event/zope.event-4.2.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ce11004217863a4827ea1a67a31730bddab9073832bdb3b9be85869259118758 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ce11004217863a4827ea1a67a31730bddab9073832bdb3b9be85869259118758 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1395244 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
Package request has been approved: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/python3-zope-event
python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.el7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 7. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2016-2d276b670c
python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.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-2016-2d276b670c
python3-zope-event-4.2.0-1.el7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.