Bug 2213588 - Review Request: python-PyAVM - Python package to handle Astronomy Visualization Metadata
Summary: Review Request: python-PyAVM - Python package to handle Astronomy Visualizati...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jonathan Steffan
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 2062847
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2023-06-08 16:08 UTC by Sergio Pascual
Modified: 2024-09-05 04:27 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2024-09-05 04:06:35 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
jonathansteffan: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Sergio Pascual 2023-06-08 16:08:48 UTC
Spec URL: https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-PyAVM.spec
SRPM URL: https://sergiopr.fedorapeople.org/python-PyAVM-0.9.5-1.fc39.src.rpm
Description: PyAVM is a Python module to represent, read, and write metadata 
following the *Astronomy Visualization Metadata* (AVM) standard
Fedora Account System Username: sergiopr

Comment 2 Jonathan Steffan 2024-08-22 20:43:27 UTC
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.
[!]: 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 and/or MIT
     License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "MIT License". 103 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/jon/Reviews/python-PyAVM/licensecheck.txt
[x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown
     must be documented in the spec.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-
     packages, /usr/lib/python3.13
[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]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 4444 bytes in 1 files.
[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).
[?]: 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).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-PyAVM-0.9.6-1.fc42.noarch.rpm
          python-PyAVM-0.9.6-1.fc42.src.rpm
=============================================== rpmlint session starts ===============================================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.12/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/tmpjg7sq357')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

python3-PyAVM.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pyavm/tests/data/ssc2004-06b1-alpha.xml /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pyavm/tests/data/sig05-021-alpha.xml:/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pyavm/tests/data/ssc2004-06a1-alpha.xml
========== 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.2 s ==========




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.5.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/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: 32, packages: 1

python3-PyAVM.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pyavm/tests/data/ssc2004-06b1-alpha.xml /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pyavm/tests/data/sig05-021-alpha.xml:/usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/pyavm/tests/data/ssc2004-06a1-alpha.xml
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/P/PyAVM/PyAVM-0.9.6.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : b3b78b3e80070db63db4fb77440e73260f8db93b5557f4aaa54511dcdac6f26d
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b3b78b3e80070db63db4fb77440e73260f8db93b5557f4aaa54511dcdac6f26d


Requires
--------
python3-PyAVM (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)



Provides
--------
python3-PyAVM:
    python-PyAVM
    python3-PyAVM
    python3.13-PyAVM
    python3.13dist(pyavm)
    python3dist(pyavm)



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -r -n python-PyAVM-0.9.6-1.fc40.src.rpm
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic
Disabled plugins: R, Java, PHP, Ocaml, Haskell, SugarActivity, Perl, C/C++, fonts
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 3 Jonathan Steffan 2024-08-22 20:44:02 UTC
[!]: 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 and/or MIT
     License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "MIT License". 103 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/jon/Reviews/python-PyAVM/licensecheck.txt

Update License tag to be "MIT AND BSD-3-Clause" and this looks good to go.

Comment 4 Jonathan Steffan 2024-08-22 22:52:04 UTC
APPROVED

Comment 5 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2024-08-23 18:45:40 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-PyAVM

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2024-08-27 07:27:28 UTC
FEDORA-2024-8542355874 (python-PyAVM-0.9.6-2.fc40) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8542355874

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2024-08-27 07:27:29 UTC
FEDORA-2024-c51593112e (python-PyAVM-0.9.6-2.fc39) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-c51593112e

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2024-08-28 03:05:24 UTC
FEDORA-2024-c51593112e has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-c51593112e \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-c51593112e

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

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2024-08-28 03:54:26 UTC
FEDORA-2024-8542355874 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-8542355874 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-8542355874

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

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2024-09-05 04:06:35 UTC
FEDORA-2024-8542355874 (python-PyAVM-0.9.6-2.fc40) has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2024-09-05 04:27:40 UTC
FEDORA-2024-c51593112e (python-PyAVM-0.9.6-2.fc39) has been pushed to the Fedora 39 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.