Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01328520-python-apypie/python-apypie.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01328520-python-apypie/python-apypie-0.2.1-1.fc33.src.rpm Project URL: https://github.com/Apipie/apypie Description: Python bindings for the Apipie - Ruby on Rails API documentation tool. Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ogajduse/apypie/build/1328520/ Fedora Account System Username: ogajduse
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - The LICENSE file is missing. Include https://github.com/Apipie/apypie/blob/master/LICENSE manually or wait till https://github.com/Apipie/apypie/pull/67 is merged and a new release available at PyPI. - All %description should end with a period. - "Requires: python%{python3_pkgversion}-requests >= 2.4.2" could be removed and the dependency generator used https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_automatically_generated_dependencies - Please add your e-mail address to the changelog entries. ===== 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: "Unknown or generated". 13 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fab/Documents/repos/reviews/1821330-python- apypie/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [!]: 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 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]: Package installs properly. [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: [ ]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [ ]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [ ]: 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. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [x]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [-]: 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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-apypie-0.2.1-1.fc33.noarch.rpm python-apypie-0.2.1-1.fc33.src.rpm python3-apypie.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Apipie -> Apiece python3-apypie.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Apipie -> Apiece python3-apypie.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro Provides python%{__default_python3_pkgversion}-apypie = 0.2.1-1.fc33 %{__default_python3_pkgversion} python-apypie.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Apipie -> Apiece python-apypie.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Apipie -> Apiece 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "en_US.UTF-8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). perl: warning: Setting locale failed. perl: warning: Please check that your locale settings: LANGUAGE = (unset), LC_ALL = (unset), LC_CTYPE = "C.UTF-8", LANG = "en_US.UTF-8" are supported and installed on your system. perl: warning: Falling back to the standard locale ("C"). python3-apypie.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) Apipie -> Apiece python3-apypie.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US Apipie -> Apiece python3-apypie.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://github.com/Apipie/apypie <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> python3-apypie.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro Provides python%{__default_python3_pkgversion}-apypie = 0.2.1-1.fc33 %{__default_python3_pkgversion} 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 4 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/a/apypie/apypie-0.2.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f9de76b8218cc5982f8c5f07d102cd67a70aa0f7af3ed7443469161c4b27d877 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f9de76b8218cc5982f8c5f07d102cd67a70aa0f7af3ed7443469161c4b27d877 Requires -------- python3-apypie (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-requests python3.8dist(requests) Provides -------- python3-apypie: python%{__default_python3_pkgversion}-apypie python-apypie python3-apypie python3.8dist(apypie) python3dist(apypie) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1821330 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Python, Generic Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Java, Ocaml, Haskell, C/C++, PHP, Perl, R, fonts Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Thanks for the review Fabian! I addressed your comments. I have chosen to manually download the license during the build for now. I will wait for the next upstream release with license included, then I will remove the 'curl' line. There are pending comments in https://github.com/Apipie/apypie/pull/67, could you please address them?
I will include the spec and the URL to the respective COPR build once it will be finished.
Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01330277-python-apypie/python-apypie.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01330277-python-apypie/python-apypie-0.2.1-2.fc33.src.rpm Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ogajduse/apypie/build/1330277/ I can see that COPR has some issues with special characters, but I have the file locally UTF-8 encoded: $ file python-apypie.spec python-apypie.spec: UTF-8 Unicode text
- "curl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Apipie/apypie/v%{version}/LICENSE -o LICENSE" The license file must be "Source1:" and copied in %prep with something like "cp -a %{SOURCE1} LICENSE)". I guess that curl would be in the base requirement but koji doesn't have network access while building packages. - "%{python3_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}-py?.?.egg-info" I would like to suggest to change it to "%{python3_sitelib}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}-py*.egg-info" otherwise there will be a build error when Python 3.10 is introduced
Otherwise looks good.
Comments addressed. Spec URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01330845-python-apypie/python-apypie.spec SRPM URL: https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/01330845-python-apypie/python-apypie-0.2.1-2.fc33.src.rpm Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/ogajduse/apypie/build/1330845/
Use "Source1: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Apipie/apypie/master/LICENSE" Please fix this before importing the package. Package APPROVED
Note that 0.2.2 has just been released which includes the LICENSE file. Probably a cleaner fix.
0.2.2 has been release with the license file in the tarball :)
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-apypie
Thank you both for the notification about the new release. I removed the license file hacks from the specfile for the new release. Build is GREEN. Spec URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/srpm-builds/01333616/python-apypie.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/srpm-builds/01333616/python-apypie-0.2.2-1.fc31.src.rpm Copr build: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/ogajduse/apypie/srpm-builds/01333616/ Koji build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=43165226 Bodhi update: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-18c8b0f4c5
FEDORA-2020-f65cf84250 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f65cf84250
FEDORA-2020-99d1b8f017 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 32. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-99d1b8f017
FEDORA-2020-4f03022d56 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 31. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4f03022d56
FEDORA-2020-4f03022d56 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-4f03022d56 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-4f03022d56 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-f65cf84250 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-f65cf84250 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-f65cf84250 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-99d1b8f017 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 testing repository. In short time you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2020-99d1b8f017 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2020-99d1b8f017 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2020-4f03022d56 has been pushed to the Fedora 31 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2020-f65cf84250 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2020-99d1b8f017 has been pushed to the Fedora 32 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.