Bug 1902978 - Review Request: pystring - Collection of C++ functions which match the interface and behavior of python's string class methods
Summary: Review Request: pystring - Collection of C++ functions which match the interf...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michel Lind
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-12-01 03:03 UTC by Richard Shaw
Modified: 2021-08-16 23:08 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-08-16 23:08:45 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
michel: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Richard Shaw 2020-12-01 03:03:11 UTC
Spec URL: https://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pystring.spec
SRPM URL: https://hobbes1069.fedorapeople.org/pystring-1.1.3-1.fc33.src.rpm

Description:
Pystring is a collection of C++ functions which match the interface and
behavior of python's string class methods using std::string. Implemented in
C++, it does not require or make use of a python interpreter. It provides
convenience and familiarity for common string operations not included in the
standard C++ library. It's also useful in environments where both C++ and
python are used.

Overlapping functionality (such as index and slice/substr) of std::string is
included to match python interfaces.

Originally developed at Sony Pictures Imageworks.
http://opensource.imageworks.com/

Fedora Account System Username: hobbes1069

Comment 1 Richard Shaw 2020-12-01 03:03:13 UTC
This package built on koji:  https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=56488268

Comment 2 Richard Shaw 2020-12-01 03:09:02 UTC
Some notes about this project:

1. It is needed for the future release of OpenColorIO 2.0

2. It is not prefixed with python- because it's not actually a python package, it does not require python at all. 

3. The CMake file is used to build the project because the extremely simplistic Makefile is not packager friendly. I have submitted the CMakeLists.txt upstream for inclusion.

Comment 3 Michel Lind 2020-12-01 03:32:49 UTC
Taking this review. Would appreciate a review of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1901740 in return, thanks!

Comment 4 Michel Lind 2020-12-01 03:52:10 UTC
This mostly looks good, except:

- -devel doesn't own %{_includedir}/pystring. You can use it instead of %{_includedir}/pystring/pystring.h, or add a %dir %{_includedir}/pystring
- I'm not sure how stable the API/ABI is. The project seems stable, so maybe this is fine, but you might want to consider deriving the SOVERSION from the version instead of setting it to 0.0. Then again it's not seen a release for 8 years so you're probably fine.
- try and shorten the summary if you can

Only the first issue is a blocker, happy to accept once it's fixed

Package Review
==============

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



===== MUST items =====

C/C++:
[x]: Package does not contain kernel modules.
[x]: Package contains no static executables.
[x]: If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a
     BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang.
[x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present.
[x]: ldconfig not called in %post and %postun for Fedora 28 and later.
[x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present.

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", "BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised"
     License". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in
     /home/michel/src/fedora/reviews/1902978-pystring/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[!]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/include/pystring
[!]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/include/pystring
[x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[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.
[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.
[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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[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]: 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 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

===== 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.
[-]: 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.
[?]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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 debuginfo package(s).
     Note: No rpmlint messages.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package
     is arched.
[x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: pystring-1.1.3-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          pystring-devel-1.1.3-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          pystring-debuginfo-1.1.3-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          pystring-debugsource-1.1.3-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
          pystring-1.1.3-1.fc34.src.rpm
pystring.x86_64: E: summary-too-long C Collection of C++ functions which match the interface and behavior of python's string class methods
pystring.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US substr -> subs tr, subs-tr, substrata
pystring-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
pystring.src: E: summary-too-long C Collection of C++ functions which match the interface and behavior of python's string class methods
pystring.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US substr -> subs tr, subs-tr, substrata
5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 3 warnings.




Rpmlint (debuginfo)
-------------------
Checking: pystring-debuginfo-1.1.3-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.





Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
pystring.x86_64: E: summary-too-long C Collection of C++ functions which match the interface and behavior of python's string class methods
pystring.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US substr -> subs tr, subs-tr, substrata
pystring-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 2 warnings.



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/imageworks/pystring/archive/v1.1.3/pystring-1.1.3.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 358a56e756e701836b69a31c75d3d9d41c34d447cf7b3775bbd5620dcd3203d9
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 358a56e756e701836b69a31c75d3d9d41c34d447cf7b3775bbd5620dcd3203d9


Requires
--------
pystring (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libc.so.6()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1()(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.0)(64bit)
    libgcc_s.so.1(GCC_3.3.1)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6()(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3)(64bit)
    libstdc++.so.6(CXXABI_1.3.9)(64bit)
    rtld(GNU_HASH)

pystring-devel (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    libpystring.so.0.0()(64bit)
    pystring(x86-64)

pystring-debuginfo (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

pystring-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):



Provides
--------
pystring:
    libpystring.so.0.0()(64bit)
    pystring
    pystring(x86-64)

pystring-devel:
    pystring-devel
    pystring-devel(x86-64)

pystring-debuginfo:
    debuginfo(build-id)
    pystring-debuginfo
    pystring-debuginfo(x86-64)

pystring-debugsource:
    pystring-debugsource
    pystring-debugsource(x86-64)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1902978
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, C/C++
Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, fonts, Perl, Python, Java, PHP, R, Ocaml, Haskell
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 5 Richard Shaw 2020-12-01 03:56:46 UTC
(In reply to Michel Alexandre Salim from comment #4)
> This mostly looks good, except:
> 
> - -devel doesn't own %{_includedir}/pystring. You can use it instead of
> %{_includedir}/pystring/pystring.h, or add a %dir %{_includedir}/pystring

Easy enough to fix :)


> - I'm not sure how stable the API/ABI is. The project seems stable, so maybe
> this is fine, but you might want to consider deriving the SOVERSION from the
> version instead of setting it to 0.0. Then again it's not seen a release for
> 8 years so you're probably fine.

I pretty much re-created the soversion from the manual Makefile. Hopefully my CMake file is accepted upstream and they bump it as appropriate.


> - try and shorten the summary if you can

Yeah, a lot of upstreams don't provide a clean one-liner description and I haven't gotten a clear answer on how long is too long when asked in the past :)

Comment 6 Richard Shaw 2020-12-01 04:08:24 UTC
I uploaded a new spec file (same link), let me know if that is sufficient.

Comment 7 Michel Lind 2020-12-01 05:06:55 UTC
Looks fine! I'd suggest uppercasing the P in 'python' in the summary, but you can do that when importing.

APPROVED

Comment 8 Richard Shaw 2020-12-01 12:48:39 UTC
Thanks for the quick review!

Comment 9 Gwyn Ciesla 2020-12-01 14:17:59 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/pystring

Comment 10 Didik Supriadi 2021-08-16 23:08:45 UTC
Package is available in repos.
Closing this review


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