Bug 1990917 - Review Request: python-pytest-grpc - Allow testing gRPC with pytest
Summary: Review Request: python-pytest-grpc - Allow testing gRPC with pytest
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jerry James
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2021-08-06 15:12 UTC by Ben Beasley
Modified: 2021-08-26 21:10 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-08-26 21:08:01 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
loganjerry: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Ben Beasley 2021-08-06 15:12:40 UTC
Spec URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/python-pytest-grpc.spec
SRPM URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/python-pytest-grpc-0.8.0-1.20210806git3f21554.fc34.src.rpm
Description:

Write tests for gRPC with pytest.

Fedora Account System Username: music

Koji mock builds:
F35: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=73391463
F34: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=73391463
F33: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=73391482

Comments on rpmlint output:

> python-pytest-grpc.src:74: W: macro-in-%changelog %autochangelog

This is just because rpmlint does not yet understand rpmautospec.

Additional comments:

This is a trivial pyproject-rpm-macros project.

Comment 1 Jerry James 2021-08-18 19:17:35 UTC
I will take this review.

Comment 2 Jerry James 2021-08-18 19:29:30 UTC
This package is APPROVED.  A comment, not an issue: the %pypi_source macro should give you a tarball without needing all of the %forge* machinery.

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

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

===== 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.
[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.
[x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 5 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 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]: 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:
[-]: 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.
[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-pytest-grpc-0.8.0-1.20210806git3f21554.fc36.noarch.rpm
          python-pytest-grpc-0.8.0-1.20210806git3f21554.fc36.src.rpm
python-pytest-grpc.src:74: W: macro-in-%changelog %autochangelog
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings.




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
rpmlint: 2.0.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml
    /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml
checks: 31, packages: 1

================= 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s =================



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/kataev/pytest-grpc/archive/3f21554fd821074c2836f65078eaace5c0569c2a/pytest-grpc-3f21554fd821074c2836f65078eaace5c0569c2a.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : e2b198078d7b57d84c4fd626611aaec99de8c5d30ffaa2589d9d2336046ed8bd
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e2b198078d7b57d84c4fd626611aaec99de8c5d30ffaa2589d9d2336046ed8bd


Requires
--------
python3-pytest-grpc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.10dist(pytest)
    python3dist(grpcio)



Provides
--------
python3-pytest-grpc:
    python-pytest-grpc
    python3-pytest-grpc
    python3.10-pytest-grpc
    python3.10dist(pytest-grpc)
    python3dist(pytest-grpc)



Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1990917 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Python, Generic
Disabled plugins: R, fonts, Java, Perl, Haskell, Ruby, PHP, SugarActivity, C/C++, Ocaml
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 3 Ben Beasley 2021-08-18 19:58:21 UTC
Thanks for the review!

> A comment, not an issue: the %pypi_source macro should give you a tarball without needing all of the %forge* machinery.

Thanks. Indeed, %{pypi_source} is simpler, but in this case, I can’t use it because upstream added a LICENSE file since the last release to PyPI. To include the LICENSE in my RPM, I must either package a git snapshot (which is what I chose) or apply the added LICENSE file as a patch to the PyPI tarball, which I think would be even more complicated.

Comment 4 Jerry James 2021-08-18 20:00:17 UTC
Gotcha.  That's a good reason for the choice you made.

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2021-08-18 20:15:50 UTC
(fedscm-admin):  The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pytest-grpc

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2021-08-18 22:17:08 UTC
FEDORA-2021-671b010a99 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-671b010a99

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2021-08-18 22:31:52 UTC
FEDORA-2021-170572cbc8 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-170572cbc8

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2021-08-19 01:42:43 UTC
FEDORA-2021-671b010a99 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-671b010a99 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-671b010a99

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2021-08-19 01:52:18 UTC
FEDORA-2021-170572cbc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-170572cbc8 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-170572cbc8

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2021-08-26 21:08:01 UTC
FEDORA-2021-671b010a99 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2021-08-26 21:10:20 UTC
FEDORA-2021-170572cbc8 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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