Spec URL: https://cstratak.fedorapeople.org/ephemeral-port-reserve.spec SRPM URL: https://cstratak.fedorapeople.org/ephemeral-port-reserve-1.1.4-1.fc35.src.rpm Description: Bind to an ephemeral port, force it into the TIME_WAIT state, and unbind it. Fedora Account System Username: cstratak Required for the latest version of python-werkzeug
The specfile looks good and I like its simplicity but I'm not sure about the naming. Upstream describe this as a tool so it might be packaged without the python- prefix. On the other hand, werkzeug uses it as a library [1]. [0] https://github.com/Yelp/ephemeral-port-reserve#ephemeral-port-reserve [1] https://github.com/pallets/werkzeug/search?q=ephemeral&type=code
> Upstream describe this as a tool so it might be packaged without the python- prefix. On the other hand, werkzeug uses it as a library. I was looking at this as well and I agree with the ambiguity. I think both naming approaches are valid here. Personally, I would go with the upstream's preference, but I wouldn't object the opossite. We should however add `%py_provides python3-ephemeral-port-reserve` if we name it ephemeral-port-reserve (or alternatively, add `Provides: ephemeral-port-reserve = %{version}-%{release}` if we name it python3-ephemeral-port-reserve).
I vote for the current name in line with upstream with added provide for the python3- prefix.
The review is basically done. Just two points to consider: - Add the provide suggested by Miro. - If there is a reason you cannot use the upstream tests, please add a comment about it to the specfile. Otherwise, include the tests. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review 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: "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lbalhar/temp/reviews/2081088-ephemeral-port- reserve/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. [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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %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 ------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output: Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/e/ephemeral_port_reserve/ephemeral_port_reserve-1.1.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b8f7da2c97090cb0801949dec1d6d40c97220505b742a70935ffbd43234c14b2 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b8f7da2c97090cb0801949dec1d6d40c97220505b742a70935ffbd43234c14b2 Requires -------- ephemeral-port-reserve (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) Provides -------- ephemeral-port-reserve: ephemeral-port-reserve python3.10dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) python3dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2081088 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: R, PHP, Haskell, C/C++, SugarActivity, Ocaml, fonts, Perl, Java Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
(In reply to Lumír Balhar from comment #4) > The review is basically done. Just two points to consider: > - Add the provide suggested by Miro. > - If there is a reason you cannot use the upstream tests, please add a > comment about it to the specfile. Otherwise, include the tests. > > Package Review > ============== > > Legend: > [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated > [ ] = Manual review 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: "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or > generated". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of > licensecheck in /home/lbalhar/temp/reviews/2081088-ephemeral-port- > reserve/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. > [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. > [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. > [!]: %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 > ------- > Cannot parse rpmlint output: > > > Rpmlint (installed packages) > ---------------------------- > Cannot parse rpmlint output: > > > Source checksums > ---------------- > https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/e/ephemeral_port_reserve/ > ephemeral_port_reserve-1.1.4.tar.gz : > CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : > b8f7da2c97090cb0801949dec1d6d40c97220505b742a70935ffbd43234c14b2 > CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : > b8f7da2c97090cb0801949dec1d6d40c97220505b742a70935ffbd43234c14b2 > > > Requires > -------- > ephemeral-port-reserve (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > /usr/bin/python3 > python(abi) > > > > Provides > -------- > ephemeral-port-reserve: > ephemeral-port-reserve > python3.10dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) > python3dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) > > > > Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07 > Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2081088 > Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 > Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic > Disabled plugins: R, PHP, Haskell, C/C++, SugarActivity, Ocaml, fonts, Perl, > Java > Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH Thanks for the review! The comments have been addressed, could you take another look at the SPEC?
The new provides are unfortunately a part of the description: rpm -q --provides 2081088-ephemeral-port-reserve/results/ephemeral-port-reserve-1.1.4-1.fc37.noarch.rpm ephemeral-port-reserve = 1.1.4-1.fc37 python3.10dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) = 1.1.4 python3dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) = 1.1.4 rpm -q --info 2081088-ephemeral-port-reserve/results/ephemeral-port-reserve-1.1.4-1.fc37.noarch.rpm Name : ephemeral-port-reserve Version : 1.1.4 Release : 1.fc37 Architecture: noarch Install Date: (not installed) Group : Unspecified Size : 9741 License : MIT Signature : (none) Source RPM : ephemeral-port-reserve-1.1.4-1.fc37.src.rpm Build Date : Wed 04 May 2022 09:43:54 AM CEST Build Host : localhost.localdomain URL : https://github.com/Yelp/ephemeral-port-reserve/ Summary : Bind to an ephemeral port, force it into the TIME_WAIT state, and unbind it. Description : Bind to an ephemeral port, force it into the TIME_WAIT state, and unbind it. Provides: python3-ephemeral-port-reserve = 1.1.4-1.fc37 Provides: python3.10-ephemeral-port-reserve = 1.1.4-1.fc37 Provides: python-ephemeral-port-reserve = 1.1.4-1.fc37
# Upstream tests are not shipped # through the pypi tarball Use the github tarball then? """ Packages MAY use sources from PyPI. However, packages SHOULD NOT use an archive that omits test suites, licenses and/or documentation present in other source archives. """ https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_source_files_from_pypi
Addressed the comments.
Package APPROVED Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review 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: "Unknown or generated", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/lbalhar/temp/reviews/2081088-ephemeral-port- reserve/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. [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. [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: ephemeral-port-reserve-1.1.4-1.fc37.noarch.rpm ephemeral-port-reserve-1.1.4-1.fc37.src.rpm Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/Yelp/ephemeral-port-reserve/archive/refs/tags/v1.1.4.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 522a3b80e885c62b9561c4150cefda7a67cad954d22d474c6f9362348828e079 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 522a3b80e885c62b9561c4150cefda7a67cad954d22d474c6f9362348828e079 Requires -------- ephemeral-port-reserve (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) Provides -------- ephemeral-port-reserve: ephemeral-port-reserve python-ephemeral-port-reserve python3-ephemeral-port-reserve python3.10-ephemeral-port-reserve python3.10dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) python3dist(ephemeral-port-reserve) Generated by fedora-review 0.8.0 (e988316) last change: 2022-04-07 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2081088 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Perl, Ocaml, PHP, Haskell, C/C++, fonts, Java, R Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
(fedscm-admin): The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ephemeral-port-reserve