Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/rpisarev/tensorflow/fedora-30-x86_64/00867891-python-absl-py/python-absl-py.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/rpisarev/tensorflow/fedora-30-x86_64/00867891-python-absl-py/python-absl-py-0.7.0-1.fc30.src.rpm Description: A repository is a collection of Python library code for building Python applications. The code is collected from Google's own Python code base, and has been extensively tested and used in production. PyPI: https://pypi.org/project/absl-py/ Documentation: https://github.com/abseil/abseil-py
Please remove the Python 2 subpackage.
The Python 2 subpackage was removed: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/rpisarev/tensorflow/fedora-30-x86_64/00868745-python-absl-py/python-absl-py.spec https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/rpisarev/tensorflow/fedora-30-x86_64/00868745-python-absl-py/python-absl-py-0.7.1-2.fc30.src.rpm
- The correct license identifier for Apache is ASL 2.0: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:Main#Software_License_List - Summary is incomplete - Please fix the description; it is a jumble of various sentences and image captions. - You can remove the manual Requires and use the automatic generator. You can also enable it on older releases if you are building there as well: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_automatically_generated_dependencies - Relatedly, enum34 is not necessary for Python 3.7 and is not even available. Consequently, this package cannot be installed. - For a source from PyPI, you can use the whole tarball URL with %pypi_source - Add %license LICENSE to %files - You should be able to delete the third_party/ directory that bundles backports for Python 2. - Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (see attachment) See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ ===== 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. [!]: 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]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* Apache License (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated", "Apache License (v2.0)". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in 1688797-python-absl-py/licensecheck.txt [!]: 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. [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). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [?]: 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. [!]: 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 10240 bytes in 1 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]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [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]: 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 must not depend on deprecated() packages. [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]: Packages MUST NOT have dependencies (either build-time or runtime) on packages named with the unversioned python- prefix unless no properly versioned package exists. Dependencies on Python packages instead MUST use names beginning with python2- or python3- as appropriate. [x]: Python packages must not contain %{pythonX_site(lib|arch)}/* in %files [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. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [?]: 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: [!]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: Mock build failed See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/#_use_rpmlint [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.4.14 starting (python version = 3.7.2)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux disabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.4.14 INFO: Mock Version: 1.4.14 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/elliott/rpmbuild/review/1688797-python-absl-py/results/python3-absl-py-0.7.1-2.fc30.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 31 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=False install /home/elliott/rpmbuild/review/1688797-python-absl-py/results/python3-absl-py-0.7.1-2.fc30.noarch.rpm Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-absl-py-0.7.1-2.fc30.noarch.rpm python-absl-py-0.7.1-2.fc30.src.rpm python3-absl-py.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US startup -> start up, start-up, upstart python3-absl-py.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US commandline -> command line, command-line, commandment python3-absl-py.noarch: W: invalid-license Apache 2.0 python-absl-py.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US startup -> start up, start-up, upstart python-absl-py.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US commandline -> command line, command-line, commandment python-absl-py.src: W: invalid-license Apache 2.0 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 6 warnings. Requires -------- python3-absl-py (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3.7dist(six) python3dist(enum34) python3dist(six) Provides -------- python3-absl-py: python3-absl-py python3.7dist(absl-py) python3dist(absl-py) Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/a/absl-py/absl-py-0.7.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b943d1c567743ed0455878fcd60bc28ac9fae38d129d1ccfad58079da00b8951 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b943d1c567743ed0455878fcd60bc28ac9fae38d129d1ccfad58079da00b8951 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (29df316) last change: 2019-03-10 Command line :/home/elliott/code/FedoraReview/try-fedora-review -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 -b 1688797 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, BATCH, EPEL7, EPEL6
Fixed noticed: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/rpisarev/tensorflow/fedora-30-x86_64/00873139-python-absl-py/python-absl-py.spec https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/rpisarev/tensorflow/fedora-30-x86_64/00873139-python-absl-py/python-absl-py-0.7.1-3.fc30.src.rpm
Were you able to find a sponsor? This spec is almost finished, but there are a few minor issues: Summary is too long. Also, there's a typo: Absel -> Abseil. %{?python_enable_dependency_generator} is no longer needed, as the releases that needed it are EOL now. It doesn't look like you're running tests; is that possible?
This message is a reminder that Fedora 30 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 30 on 2020-05-26. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '30'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 30 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 30 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2020-05-26. Fedora 30 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.