Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-ops/python-lazy-ops.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-ops/python-lazy-ops-0.2.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Lazy transposing and slicing of h5py Datasets and zarr arrays Fedora Account System Username: ankursinha
I was going to find the commit corresponding to the PyPI tarball, even though upstream did not tag it, and suggest using that for the tests—but there isn’t one! The actual package sources (i.e., lazy_ops/ directory) match https://github.com/catalystneuro/lazy_ops/commit/407504d1c4b1447e9527e7bddd771b6cc6f4810a, but setup.py is not updated for 0.2.0 in that commit. In the next commit, the version is 0.2.1, which is newer than any PyPI release, and there are additional changes in lazy_ops/. ----- I guess something still has to be done, because there is no license file in the PyPI tarball, and the BSD license requires the license/copyright text to be reproduced (https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text). The more aggressive option would be to combine the GitHub tarball for commit 407504d1c4b1447e9527e7bddd771b6cc6f4810a with the PyPI 0.2.0 release tarball, using only the setup.py from the latter. That would give you the license file *and* let you run the tests. Or, you could keep the PyPI tarball as you have it, and add https://github.com/catalystneuro/lazy_ops/raw/407504d1c4b1447e9527e7bddd771b6cc6f4810a/LICENSE as an additional source, still forgoing the tests. What do you think?
I'd rather not combine bits---best to either use PyPi or the GitHub release tar. For the time being, I think it's best to use the PyPi release and include the license as a different source. I've also filed this upstream now: https://github.com/catalystneuro/lazy_ops/issues/26 I've requested that they keep pypi and GitHub in sync, and hopefully with that we'll be able to use the GitHub sources in the future and run all tests. Updated spec/srpm: Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-ops/python-lazy-ops.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-ops/python-lazy-ops-0.2.0-1.fc35.src.rpm
Thanks. The license file handling looks good to me. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Dist tag is present. (fedora-review does not understand rpmautospec; there is no problem here) - Manual BuildRequires are not needed. Change %pyproject_buildrequires to %pyproject_buildrequires -r and remove BuildRequires: %{py3_dist numpy} BuildRequires: %{py3_dist h5py} BuildRequires: %{py3_dist zarr} Note that install_requires in setup.py only specifies h5py and zarr, even though this package uses numpy directly. Please consider asking upstream to add an explicit direct dependency on numpy. However, both h5py and zarr depend on numpy, so the implicit dependency will always be satisfied. - Since python3-devel now requires pyproject-rpm-macros in all releases, BuildRequires: pyproject-rpm-macros is no longer needed. ===== 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: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 11 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/reviewer/2005122-python-lazy-ops/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 [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]: 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. $ rpm -qL -p results/python3-lazy-ops-0.2.0-1.fc36.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/lazy_ops-0.2.0.dist-info/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: [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). [?]: 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-lazy-ops-0.2.0-1.fc36.noarch.rpm python-lazy-ops-0.2.0-1.fc36.src.rpm python3-lazy-ops.noarch: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zarr -> arr, Carr, Parr python-lazy-ops.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US zarr -> arr, Carr, Parr python-lazy-ops.src:55: W: macro-in-%changelog %autochangelog 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/catalystneuro/lazy_ops/raw/407504d1c4b1447e9527e7bddd771b6cc6f4810a/LICENSE : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 42e655522ab4ff6dbd7c4bb5d8c597a22c2e7d0548e53a63db49fe863c508558 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 42e655522ab4ff6dbd7c4bb5d8c597a22c2e7d0548e53a63db49fe863c508558 https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/l/lazy_ops/lazy_ops-0.2.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 5f3ea1ab296f63e4dd4b2bef065356f1d797b07c96a6f7f5bbc3232c32f83bcc CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5f3ea1ab296f63e4dd4b2bef065356f1d797b07c96a6f7f5bbc3232c32f83bcc Requires -------- python3-lazy-ops (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3.10dist(h5py) python3.10dist(zarr) Provides -------- python3-lazy-ops: python-lazy-ops python3-lazy-ops python3.10-lazy-ops python3.10dist(lazy-ops) python3dist(lazy-ops) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2005122 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: Java, SugarActivity, Haskell, Ocaml, PHP, Perl, fonts, C/C++, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Thanks very much for the review, Ben! - removed the BRs and used `pyproject_buildrequires -r`, but I've left numpy in there for the moment just so that it's explicitly listed. Also sent a PR upstream for future releases: https://github.com/catalystneuro/lazy_ops/pull/27 - removed uneeded pyproject-rpm-macros BR Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-ops/python-lazy-ops.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-lazy-ops/python-lazy-ops-0.2.0-1.fc35.src.rpm Cheers,
Thanks! Review of the spec file diff confirms you’ve included all of my suggestions, and the package is approved. --- srpm-unpacked/python-lazy-ops.spec 2021-10-15 14:01:49.000000000 -0400 +++ re-review/python-lazy-ops.spec 2021-10-18 18:45:07.145125920 -0400 @@ -23,10 +23,10 @@ %package -n python3-lazy-ops Summary: %{summary} BuildRequires: python3-devel -BuildRequires: pyproject-rpm-macros +# Not listed in requirements +# PR for future releases: +# https://github.com/catalystneuro/lazy_ops/pull/27 BuildRequires: %{py3_dist numpy} -BuildRequires: %{py3_dist h5py} -BuildRequires: %{py3_dist zarr} %description -n python3-lazy-ops %_description @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ cp %{SOURCE1} . %generate_buildrequires -%pyproject_buildrequires +%pyproject_buildrequires -r %build %pyproject_wheel
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-lazy-ops
FEDORA-2021-cbd67f78ca has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-cbd67f78ca
FEDORA-2021-f4577d5287 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-f4577d5287
FEDORA-2021-f4577d5287 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-f4577d5287 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-f4577d5287 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2021-cbd67f78ca 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-cbd67f78ca \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-cbd67f78ca See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2021-cbd67f78ca has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2021-f4577d5287 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.