Spec URL: https://sumantrom.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-concentration.spec SRPM URL: https://sumantrom.fedorapeople.org/rpms/python-concentration-1.1.5-1.fc34.src.rpm Description: Stay focused on work when you want, and goof off when you don't. Concentration is a simple Python 3 console utility to block distracting sites when you need to focus, while allowing you to easily take timed breaks. Fedora Account System Username: Sumantrom
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package does not install. Looks like the hug library (https://github.com/hugapi/hug) needs to be packaged first. - License field in the SRPM does not match the spec file. Was the spec file edited after the srpm was created? ===== 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. [ ]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "Expat License", "*No copyright* Expat License", "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/bcotton/fedora/packages/reviews/1976464-python- concentration/licensecheck.txt [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 [-]: 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]: 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 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. [-]: 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: [-]: 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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [?]: 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 [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 2.11 starting (python version = 3.9.5, NVR = mock-2.11-1.fc34)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins INFO: Signal handler active Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled package manager cache Start: cleaning package manager metadata Finish: cleaning package manager metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 2.11 INFO: Mock Version: 2.11 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/bcotton/fedora/packages/reviews/1976464-python-concentration/results/python3-concentration-1.1.5-1.fc35.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed: # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 35 --setopt=deltarpm=False --allowerasing --disableplugin=local --disableplugin=spacewalk install /home/bcotton/fedora/packages/reviews/1976464-python-concentration/results/python3-concentration-1.1.5-1.fc35.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-concentration-1.1.5-1.fc35.noarch.rpm python-concentration-1.1.5-1.fc35.src.rpm python3-concentration.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codecov -> codeine python3-concentration.noarch: W: invalid-license None python3-concentration.noarch: W: invalid-url URL None python3-concentration.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/concentration/run.py 644 /usr/bin/env python python3-concentration.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary concentration python-concentration.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US codecov -> codeine python-concentration.src: W: invalid-license None python-concentration.src: W: invalid-url URL None 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 7 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/c/concentration/concentration-1.1.5.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 861ac13fea2b1f2828f9aaf6449b77552ad0ff9bfc2336be8b8508f21b7a3e55 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 861ac13fea2b1f2828f9aaf6449b77552ad0ff9bfc2336be8b8508f21b7a3e55 Requires -------- python3-concentration (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (python3.10dist(hug) < 3 with python3.10dist(hug) >= 2.6.1) (python3dist(hug) >= 2.6.1 with python3dist(hug) < 3) /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3dist(setuptools) Provides -------- python3-concentration: python-concentration python3-concentration python3.10-concentration python3.10dist(concentration) python3dist(concentration) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/bcotton/fedora/packages/reviews/1976464-python-concentration/srpm/python-concentration.spec 2021-06-28 13:45:33.552570252 -0400 +++ /home/bcotton/fedora/packages/reviews/1976464-python-concentration/srpm-unpacked/python-concentration.spec 2021-06-26 06:28:32.000000000 -0400 @@ -7,5 +7,5 @@ Summary: Get work done when you need to, goof off when you don't -License: MIT +License: None URL: None Source0: %{pypi_source} @@ -16,5 +16,5 @@ %description -Python concentration is magic you need and the one you deserve +Concentration [ %description -n python3-%{pypi_name} -Python concentration is magic you need and the one you deserve +Concentration [ last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1976464 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: R, SugarActivity, Java, Ocaml, C/C++, fonts, Haskell, PHP, Perl Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
A couple of other notes: * If you want to package the hug library, you can assign that review to me then you create it. If you do not want to package the hug library then you should find someone willing to maintain it or close this review request. * Please set the URL in the spec file to the PyPi listing for the package * I am not a sponsor for the packager group, so once the review is approved, you will need to find a sponsor before you can request the repo: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group
- This is not needed anymore, it is now automatic: %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{pypi_name}} - The requires should also be autodetected Requires: (python3dist(hug) >= 2.6.1 with python3dist(hug) < 3) Requires: python3dist(setuptools) - I'd suggest you also use the new pyproject macros, here's a sample: Name: python-iniconfig Version: 1.0.0 Release: 1%{?dist} Summary: Brain-dead simple parsing of ini files License: MIT URL: http://github.com/RonnyPfannschmidt/iniconfig BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: python3-devel BuildRequires: pyproject-rpm-macros Source0: %{pypi_source iniconfig} # Backport: Fix pytest 5+ compatibility Patch1: %{url}/commit/41076a67.patch # pytest 6+ needs this and this uses pytest for tests %bcond_without tests %global _description %{expand: iniconfig is a small and simple INI-file parser module having a unique set of features: * tested against Python2.4 across to Python3.2, Jython, PyPy * maintains order of sections and entries * supports multi-line values with or without line-continuations * supports "#" comments everywhere * raises errors with proper line-numbers * no bells and whistles like automatic substitutions * iniconfig raises an Error if two sections have the same name.} %description %_description %package -n python3-iniconfig Summary: %{summary} %description -n python3-iniconfig %_description %prep %autosetup -n iniconfig-%{version} %generate_buildrequires %pyproject_buildrequires %{?with_tests:-t} %build %pyproject_wheel %install %pyproject_install %pyproject_save_files iniconfig %if %{with tests} %check %tox %endif %files -n python3-iniconfig -f %{pyproject_files} %doc README.txt %license LICENSE %changelog * Mon Jul 13 2020 Miro Hrončok <mhroncok> - 1.0.0-1 - Initial package
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time, but it seems that the review is still being working out by you. If this is right, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag and try to reach out the submitter to proceed with the review. If you're not interested in reviewing this ticket anymore, please clear the fedora-review flag and reset the assignee, so that a new reviewer can take this ticket. Without any reply, this request will shortly be resetted.
Resetting this review to an initial state, to give others a chance to do the review.
This is an automatic check from review-stats script. This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the NEEDINFO flag. You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group. Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned and will be closed. Thank you for your patience.
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script. The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month. As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.