Bug 1842475 - Review Request: python-publicsuffix2 - Get a public suffix for a domain name using the Public Suffix List
Summary: Review Request: python-publicsuffix2 - Get a public suffix for a domain name ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Fabian Affolter
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-06-01 11:12 UTC by Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski
Modified: 2020-06-14 22:59 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-06-14 22:59:00 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
mail: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2020-06-01 11:12:03 UTC
Spec URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-publicsuffix2/python-publicsuffix2.spec
SRPM URL: https://rathann.fedorapeople.org/review/python-publicsuffix2/python-publicsuffix2-2.20191221-1.fc33.src.rpm

Description:
This module allows you to get the public suffix, as well as the registrable
domain, of a domain name using the Public Suffix List from
http://publicsuffix.org

This module builds the public suffix list as a Trie structure, making it more
efficient than other string-based modules available for the same purpose. It can
be used effectively in large-scale distributed environments, such as PySpark.

The code is a fork of the publicsuffix package and includes the same base API.
In addition, it contains a few variants useful for certain use cases, such as
the option to ignore wildcards or return only the extended TLD (eTLD). You just
need to import publicsuffix2 instead.

Fedora Account System Username: rathann

Comment 1 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2020-06-01 11:28:28 UTC
$ rpmlint .
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US registrable -> registrar, registrant, strategist
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US publicsuffix -> public suffix, public-suffix, publicist
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wildcards -> wild cards, wild-cards, wildcatters
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eTLD -> ETD
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US registrable -> registrar, registrant, strategist
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US publicsuffix -> public suffix, public-suffix, publicist
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wildcards -> wild cards, wild-cards, wildcatters
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eTLD -> ETD
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/publicsuffix2/public_suffix_list.dat ../../../../share/publicsuffix/public_suffix_list.dat
2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.

Spelling errors should obviously be ignored. The dangling-relative-symlink warning is expected.

License (MIT) is different from upstream (MIT and MPLv2.0), as the MPLv2.0-licensed public_suffix_list.dat file is unbundled.

koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=45279055

Comment 2 Fabian Affolter 2020-06-02 12:37:02 UTC
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- Package contains BR: python3-devel


===== 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", "Expat License Mozilla Public License
     (v2.0)", "*No copyright* Mozilla Public License (v2.0)". 7 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/fab/Documents/repos/reviews/1842475-python-
     publicsuffix2/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.9/site-
     packages, /usr/lib/python3.9
[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 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 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.
[!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[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.
[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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-publicsuffix2-2.20191221-1.fc33.noarch.rpm
          python-publicsuffix2-2.20191221-1.fc33.src.rpm
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US registrable -> registrar, registrant, strategist
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US publicsuffix -> public suffix, public-suffix, publicist
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wildcards -> wild cards, wild-cards, wildcatters
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eTLD -> ETD
python3-publicsuffix2.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/python3.9/site-packages/publicsuffix2/public_suffix_list.dat ../../../../share/publicsuffix/public_suffix_list.dat
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US registrable -> registrar, registrant, strategist
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US publicsuffix -> public suffix, public-suffix, publicist
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US wildcards -> wild cards, wild-cards, wildcatters
python-publicsuffix2.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US eTLD -> ETD
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 9 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/publicsuffix2/publicsuffix2-2.20191221.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 00f8cc31aa8d0d5592a5ced19cccba7de428ebca985db26ac852d920ddd6fe7b
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 00f8cc31aa8d0d5592a5ced19cccba7de428ebca985db26ac852d920ddd6fe7b


Requires
--------
python3-publicsuffix2 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    publicsuffix-list



Provides
--------
python3-publicsuffix2:
    python3-publicsuffix2



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.5 (5fa5b7e) last change: 2020-02-16
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1842475
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: Perl, C/C++, Ocaml, fonts, Java, Haskell, PHP, SugarActivity, R
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Please fix the remaining issue before the import. Package APPROVED.

Comment 3 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2020-06-03 14:38:37 UTC
Thanks for the quick review, Fabian.

What's wrong with BR: python3-devel?

Python guidelines say:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_dependencies

Dependencies

Packages building for Python 3 will need BuildRequires: python3-devel.

Comment 4 Fabian Affolter 2020-06-03 14:59:14 UTC
(In reply to Fabian Affolter from comment #2)
> Package Review
> ==============
> 
> Legend:
> [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
> [ ] = Manual review needed
> 
> 
> Issues:
> =======
> - Package contains BR: python3-devel

Sorry, *must* was missing.

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2020-06-04 16:09:11 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-publicsuffix2

Comment 6 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2020-06-14 22:59:00 UTC
Imported and built in rawhide (with the requested fix).


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.