Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-papermill/python-papermill.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-papermill/python-papermill-2.4.0-2.fc39.src.rpm Description: papermill is a tool for parameterizing, executing, and analyzing Jupyter Notebooks. Papermill lets you: - parameterize notebooks - execute notebooks This opens up new opportunities for how notebooks can be used. For example: - Perhaps you have a financial report that you wish to run with different values on the first or last day of a month or at the beginning or end of the year, using parameters makes this task easier. - Do you want to run a notebook and depending on its results, choose a particular notebook to run next? You can now programmatically execute a workflow without having to copy and paste from notebook to notebook manually. Papermill takes an opinionated approach to notebook parameterization and execution based on our experiences using notebooks at scale in data pipelines. Fedora Account System Username: ankursinha
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=98070415
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5572933 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2173665-python-papermill/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05572933-python-papermill/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Dist tag is present. OK: rpmautospec - The Summary matches the “description” in setup.py, but that string has a typo. Change “Parametrize” to “Parameterize” in the spec file and, if you like, apply https://github.com/nteract/papermill/pull/714 as a patch. I blame https://pypi.org/project/parametrize/ for ruining the spelling of this word in Python-land. - If you are using help2man for the man page, I would like to suggest generating it at build time so it stays up to date. I suspect you didn’t do this because you don’t have the “papermill” executable entry point in %build. One way to do this would be to make an entry point in %build strictly for the use of help2man. This is kind of a frustrating endeavor. Personally, I would give up on the “purity” of the sections and just generate the man page in %install: BuildRequires: help2man […] %install […] # Man page is generated in %%install because we need the entry point: install -d '%{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1' PYTHONPATH='%{buildroot}%{python3_sitelib}' help2man \ --no-info --name='%{summary}' --version-string='%{version}' \ --output='%{buildroot}%{_mandir}/man1/papermill.1' \ '%{buildroot}%{_bindir}/papermill' Here I’ve also switched from the short options to the long options because it is easier to understand what is happening, and I’m using RPM macros for the summary and version. - This appears twice in a row: BuildRequires: python3-pytest and probably belongs inside %if %{with tests} / %endif. The test dependencies would be better written: BuildRequires: python3dist(pytest) BuildRequires: python3dist(ipykernel) BuildRequires: python3dist(pyarrow) or BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pytest} BuildRequires: %{py3_dist ipykernel} BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pyarrow} Normally I would say that it might be even better to patch out unwanted dependencies from requirements/dev.txt and generate BR’s from the “test” extra, but there are so many linters and other unnecessary dependencies there that it is probably reasonable to keep doing this manually. - There are extras that should have corresponding metapackages. The following extras are for development or testing and can be ignored: test, dev. The “black” extra is actually for formatting parameters, not for linting papermill, so it should be included. %pyproject_extras_subpkg -n python3-papermill all s3 azure gcs hdfs github black […] # For now, “all” does not include “github”; see # https://github.com/nteract/papermill/pull/715. %pyproject_buildrequires -x all,github - You could, if you like, add python3dist(pytest-xdist) to the BuildRequires and add “-n auto -v” to the pytest options to run the tests in parallel. This speeds things up quite a bit, although it’s possible that you could encounter a race condition in the tests down the road. ===== 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", "BSD 3-Clause License". 94 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/reviewer/2173665-python-papermill/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 20480 bytes in 2 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). [x]: Package functions as described. (tests pass) [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. [?]: 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: [!]: 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) OK: rpmautospec [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-papermill-2.4.0-2.fc39.noarch.rpm python-papermill-2.4.0-2.fc39.src.rpm =============================================== rpmlint session starts =============================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpmybssvef')] checks: 31, packages: 2 python-papermill.src: W: strange-permission python-papermill.spec 600 ================ 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.3 s ================ Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.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 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/papermill/papermill-2.4.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6f8f8a9b06b39677f207c09100c8d386bcf592f0cbbdda9f0f50e81445697627 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6f8f8a9b06b39677f207c09100c8d386bcf592f0cbbdda9f0f50e81445697627 Requires -------- python3-papermill (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3.11dist(ansiwrap) python3.11dist(click) python3.11dist(entrypoints) python3.11dist(nbclient) python3.11dist(nbformat) python3.11dist(pyyaml) python3.11dist(requests) python3.11dist(tenacity) python3.11dist(tqdm) Provides -------- python3-papermill: python-papermill python3-papermill python3.11-papermill python3.11dist(papermill) python3dist(papermill) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/reviewer/2173665-python-papermill/srpm/python-papermill.spec 2023-03-03 08:28:16.606887001 -0500 +++ /home/reviewer/2173665-python-papermill/srpm-unpacked/python-papermill.spec 2023-02-27 10:12:58.000000000 -0500 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.3.5) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 2; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + %bcond_without tests @@ -92,3 +102,7 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +* Mon Feb 27 2023 Ankur Sinha (Ankur Sinha Gmail) <sanjay.ankur> - 2.4.0-2 +- feat: ready for review + +* Mon Feb 27 2023 Ankur Sinha (Ankur Sinha Gmail) <sanjay.ankur> - 2.4.0-1 +- init Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2173665 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: fonts, R, Haskell, Ocaml, PHP, SugarActivity, Java, Perl, C/C++ Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
Thanks for the review! Updated spec/srpm: Spec URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-papermill/python-papermill.spec SRPM URL: https://ankursinha.fedorapeople.org/python-papermill/python-papermill-2.4.0-3.fc39.src.rpm Changelog: https://pagure.io/python-papermill/c/3153a4bf0a49c659a45012addc06b1a496fbdf66?branch=main feat: update as per review comments - spelling corrections - add extra subpkgs - generate man page in build - parallelise pytest - correct BRs Cheers, Ankur
Created attachment 1953334 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 5572933 to 5703170
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/5703170 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2173665-python-papermill/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/05703170-python-papermill/fedora-review/review.txt Please take a look if any issues were found. --- This comment was created by the fedora-review-service https://github.com/FrostyX/fedora-review-service If you want to trigger a new Copr build, add a comment containing new Spec and SRPM URLs or [fedora-review-service-build] string.
Package APPROVED. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Dist tag is present. OK: fedora-review does not understand rpmautospec ===== 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", "BSD 3-Clause License". 94 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/reviewer/2173665-python-papermill/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. $ rpm -qL -p results/python3-papermill-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/papermill-2.4.0.dist-info/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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 20480 bytes in 2 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). [x]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-papermill , python3-papermill+all , python3-papermill+s3 , python3-papermill+azure , python3-papermill+gcs , python3-papermill+hdfs , python3-papermill+github , python3-papermill+black [x]: Package functions as described. (tests pass) [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: [!]: 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) OK: fedora-review is confused by rpmautospec [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-papermill-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+all-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+s3-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+azure-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+gcs-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+hdfs-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+github-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python3-papermill+black-2.4.0-3.fc39.noarch.rpm python-papermill-2.4.0-3.fc39.src.rpm =============================================== rpmlint session starts =============================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp0f6aetc3')] checks: 31, packages: 9 python-papermill.src: W: strange-permission python-papermill.spec 600 python3-papermill+all.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+azure.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+black.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+gcs.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+github.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+hdfs.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+s3.noarch: W: no-documentation ================ 9 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 8 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s ================ Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 8 python3-papermill+s3.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+github.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+black.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+azure.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+gcs.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+all.noarch: W: no-documentation python3-papermill+hdfs.noarch: W: no-documentation 8 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/papermill/papermill-2.4.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 6f8f8a9b06b39677f207c09100c8d386bcf592f0cbbdda9f0f50e81445697627 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 6f8f8a9b06b39677f207c09100c8d386bcf592f0cbbdda9f0f50e81445697627 Requires -------- python3-papermill (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3.11dist(ansiwrap) python3.11dist(click) python3.11dist(entrypoints) python3.11dist(nbclient) python3.11dist(nbformat) python3.11dist(pyyaml) python3.11dist(requests) python3.11dist(tenacity) python3.11dist(tqdm) python3-papermill+all (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(azure-datalake-store) python3.11dist(azure-storage-blob) python3.11dist(black) python3.11dist(boto3) python3.11dist(gcsfs) python3.11dist(pyarrow) python3.11dist(requests) python3-papermill+s3 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(boto3) python3-papermill+azure (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(azure-datalake-store) python3.11dist(azure-storage-blob) python3.11dist(requests) python3-papermill+gcs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(gcsfs) python3-papermill+hdfs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(pyarrow) python3-papermill+github (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(pygithub) python3-papermill+black (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-papermill python3.11dist(black) Provides -------- python3-papermill: python-papermill python3-papermill python3.11-papermill python3.11dist(papermill) python3dist(papermill) python3-papermill+all: python-papermill+all python3-papermill+all python3.11-papermill+all python3.11dist(papermill[all]) python3dist(papermill[all]) python3-papermill+s3: python-papermill+s3 python3-papermill+s3 python3.11-papermill+s3 python3.11dist(papermill[s3]) python3dist(papermill[s3]) python3-papermill+azure: python-papermill+azure python3-papermill+azure python3.11-papermill+azure python3.11dist(papermill[azure]) python3dist(papermill[azure]) python3-papermill+gcs: python-papermill+gcs python3-papermill+gcs python3.11-papermill+gcs python3.11dist(papermill[gcs]) python3dist(papermill[gcs]) python3-papermill+hdfs: python-papermill+hdfs python3-papermill+hdfs python3.11-papermill+hdfs python3.11dist(papermill[hdfs]) python3dist(papermill[hdfs]) python3-papermill+github: python-papermill+github python3-papermill+github python3.11-papermill+github python3.11dist(papermill[github]) python3dist(papermill[github]) python3-papermill+black: python-papermill+black python3-papermill+black python3.11-papermill+black python3.11dist(papermill[black]) python3dist(papermill[black]) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/reviewer/2173665-python-papermill/srpm/python-papermill.spec 2023-03-24 09:54:16.206607196 -0400 +++ /home/reviewer/2173665-python-papermill/srpm-unpacked/python-papermill.spec 2023-03-23 20:00:00.000000000 -0400 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.3.5) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 3; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + %bcond_without tests @@ -99,3 +109,10 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +* Fri Mar 24 2023 Ankur Sinha (Ankur Sinha Gmail) <sanjay.ankur> - 2.4.0-3 +- Uncommitted changes + +* Mon Feb 27 2023 Ankur Sinha (Ankur Sinha Gmail) <sanjay.ankur> - 2.4.0-2 +- feat: ready for review + +* Mon Feb 27 2023 Ankur Sinha (Ankur Sinha Gmail) <sanjay.ankur> - 2.4.0-1 +- init Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2173665 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: Perl, SugarActivity, Ocaml, C/C++, R, Java, fonts, PHP, Haskell Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-papermill
FEDORA-2023-a5508a0066 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-a5508a0066
FEDORA-2023-a5508a0066 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-81c9edccbe has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-81c9edccbe
FEDORA-2023-88ad52b670 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-88ad52b670
FEDORA-2023-88ad52b670 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-88ad52b670 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-88ad52b670 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-81c9edccbe has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-81c9edccbe See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-81c9edccbe has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-88ad52b670 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.