Spec URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/python-colorthief.spec SRPM URL: https://atim.fedorapeople.org/python-colorthief-0.2.1-1.fc39.src.rpm Description: A Python module for grabbing the color palette from an image. Fedora Account System Username: atim
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=107548617
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6528241 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244307-python-colorthief/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06528241-python-colorthief/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.
First thing will be to get the license approved by Fedora Legal: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/license-review-process/ Might be difficult for this package.
https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/382
License approved https://gitlab.com/fedora/legal/fedora-license-data/-/issues/382#note_1604587623 Added annotation about license in Spec file. https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/atim/playground/fedora-39-x86_64/06529892-python-colorthief/python-colorthief.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/atim/playground/fedora-39-x86_64/06529892-python-colorthief/python-colorthief-0.2.1-1.fc39.src.rpm
Created attachment 1994221 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 6528241 to 6532600
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6532600 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244307-python-colorthief/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06532600-python-colorthief/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.
Notes ===== MUST: - License field is not SPDX. - Please run smoke tests. SHOULD: - The python3dist(pillow) requires isn't needed thanks to the automatic dependency generator. - The -t option in %pyproject_buildrequires is useless. - Maybe include the demo.py file as documentation? But if it's a hassle, don't mind, it isn't that important. 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: "BSD 3-Clause License", "Unknown or generated". 12 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/home/lyes/Documents/reviews/2244307-python- colorthief/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. [-]: 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. [!]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 2179 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [!]: Python packages MUST at least run smoke tests. [-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?) [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. [!]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python Note: Smoke tests. [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 ===== 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: python3-colorthief-0.2.1-1.fc40.noarch.rpm python-colorthief-0.2.1-1.fc40.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/tmp83epv2qf')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python3-colorthief.noarch: W: python-missing-require Pillow python-colorthief.src: W: description-shorter-than-summary python3-colorthief.noarch: W: description-shorter-than-summary ============================================================ 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.5 s ============================================================ Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ 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 checks: 32, packages: 1 python3-colorthief.noarch: W: python-missing-require Pillow python3-colorthief.noarch: W: description-shorter-than-summary 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/c/colorthief/colorthief-0.2.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 079cb0c95bdd669c4643e2f7494de13b0b6029d5cdbe2d74d5d3c3386bd57221 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 079cb0c95bdd669c4643e2f7494de13b0b6029d5cdbe2d74d5d3c3386bd57221 Requires -------- python3-colorthief (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3.12dist(pillow) python3dist(pillow) Provides -------- python3-colorthief: python-colorthief python3-colorthief python3.12-colorthief python3.12dist(colorthief) python3dist(colorthief) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2244307 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Ocaml, PHP, SugarActivity, R, Java, fonts, Haskell, Perl, C/C++ Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Thanks! > License field is not SPDX. Quote from license-fedora2spdx: "the input is already valid SPDX formula". I guess you looking on old one Spec? > Please run smoke tests. Done. > The python3dist(pillow) requires isn't needed thanks to the automatic > dependency generator. Done. > The -t option in %pyproject_buildrequires is useless. Why it mentioned in Fedora guidelines then? https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_example_spec_file > Maybe include the demo.py file as documentation? But if it's a hassle, > don't mind, it isn't that important. Done. --- https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/atim/playground/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06888248-python-colorthief/python-colorthief.spec https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/atim/playground/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06888248-python-colorthief/python-colorthief-0.2.1-1.fc40.src.rpm --- I am also gladly add you as co-maintainter if you would like? You are good at Python and in general a maintainer who updates packages on time, which is great.
Created attachment 2008410 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 6532600 to 6888264
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/6888264 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2244307-python-colorthief/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/06888264-python-colorthief/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.
> Quote from license-fedora2spdx: "the input is already valid SPDX formula". I guess you looking on old one Spec? Indeed ! > Why it mentioned in Fedora guidelines then? https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_example_spec_file It's for the tox deps, if they exist. Here, they don't : https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_build_macros > I am also gladly add you as co-maintainter if you would like? You are good at Python and in general a maintainer who updates packages on time, which is great. Sure! It'll allow us to maintain the Komikku stack together. --- New nitpicks I've found --- Consider dropping i686 : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval (it also concerns noarch packages it seem) by adding : ``` ExcludeArch: %{ix86} ``` Consider using %autorelease/%autochangelog, they are now recommended in Fedora (but not obligatory) : https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Rpmautospec_by_Default Also, you can also remove : ``` %license LICENSE ``` Learned that recently, but the new python tools do that automatically. Test it by doing : ``` rpm -qL python3-colorthief-0.2.1-1.fc40.noarch.rpm ``` -L shows license files ! --- Anyway, all those are only suggestion, the package is thus approved !
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-colorthief
FEDORA-2024-3f669f3fd3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-3f669f3fd3
FEDORA-2024-3f669f3fd3 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2024-3f669f3fd3 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-3f669f3fd3 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2024-3f669f3fd3 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.