Bug 2269698 - Review Request: python-arm-preprocessing - Data preprocessing for Association Rule Mining (ARM)
Summary: Review Request: python-arm-preprocessing - Data preprocessing for Association...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Iztok Fister Jr.
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2024-03-15 12:12 UTC by Sandro
Modified: 2024-03-18 12:10 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2024-03-18 12:05:18 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
iztok: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Sandro 2024-03-15 12:12:25 UTC
Spec URL: https://gui1ty.fedorapeople.org/review/python-arm-preprocessing.spec
SRPM URL: https://gui1ty.fedorapeople.org/review/python-arm-preprocessing-0.2.1-1.fc41.src.rpm

Description: 

arm-preprocessing is a lightweight Python library supporting several
key steps involving data preparation, manipulation, and discretisation
for Association Rule Mining (ARM). 🧠 Embrace its minimalistic design
that prioritises simplicity. 💡 The framework is intended to be fully
extensible and offers seamless integration with related ARM libraries
(e.g., NiaARM). 🔗

Fedora Account System Username: gui1ty

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2024-03-15 17:55:36 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7165361
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2269698-python-arm-preprocessing/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07165361-python-arm-preprocessing/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.

Comment 2 Sandro 2024-03-17 15:56:23 UTC
I'm assuming you are intending to do the review since you set the corresponding flag. If not feel free to undo my changes and clear the flag.

Comment 3 Iztok Fister Jr. 2024-03-18 09:42:49 UTC
Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
=======
- Dist tag is present.


===== 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". 59 files have unknown license. Detailed output of
     licensecheck in /home/iztok/2269698-python-arm-
     preprocessing/licensecheck.txt
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages,
     /usr/lib/python3.12
[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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size
     (~1MB) or number of files.
     Note: Documentation size is 10491 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression.
[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]: 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.
[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

===== 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:
[!]: 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)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-arm-preprocessing-0.2.1-1.fc41.noarch.rpm
          python-arm-preprocessing-0.2.1-1.fc41.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/tmpgz305n7l')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

python-arm-preprocessing.src: E: summary-too-long Implementation of several preprocessing techniques for Association Rule Mining (ARM)
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: summary-too-long Implementation of several preprocessing techniques for Association Rule Mining (ARM)
python-arm-preprocessing.src: E: spelling-error ('discretisation', '%description -l en_US discretisation -> discretionary, discretion, discrimination')
python-arm-preprocessing.src: E: spelling-error ('minimalistic', '%description -l en_US minimalistic -> minimalist, minimalism, animistic')
python-arm-preprocessing.src: E: spelling-error ('prioritises', '%description -l en_US prioritises -> priorities, prioritizes, prioritize')
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: spelling-error ('discretisation', '%description -l en_US discretisation -> discretionary, discretion, discrimination')
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: spelling-error ('minimalistic', '%description -l en_US minimalistic -> minimalist, minimalism, animistic')
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: spelling-error ('prioritises', '%description -l en_US prioritises -> priorities, prioritizes, prioritize')
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 0 warnings, 11 filtered, 8 badness; has taken 0.8 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-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: summary-too-long Implementation of several preprocessing techniques for Association Rule Mining (ARM)
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: spelling-error ('discretisation', '%description -l en_US discretisation -> discretionary, discretion, discrimination')
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: spelling-error ('minimalistic', '%description -l en_US minimalistic -> minimalist, minimalism, animistic')
python3-arm-preprocessing.noarch: E: spelling-error ('prioritises', '%description -l en_US prioritises -> priorities, prioritizes, prioritize')
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings, 7 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.1 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/firefly-cpp/arm-preprocessing/archive/0.2.1/arm-preprocessing-0.2.1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : bb05bcb50294bd764cab2ae0b821e73f76c5f449647d39e81664a220cd015ab3
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : bb05bcb50294bd764cab2ae0b821e73f76c5f449647d39e81664a220cd015ab3


Requires
--------
python3-arm-preprocessing (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    (python3.12dist(niaarm) < 0.4~~ with python3.12dist(niaarm) >= 0.3.5)
    (python3.12dist(pandas) < 3~~ with python3.12dist(pandas) >= 2.1.1)
    (python3.12dist(scikit-learn) < 2~~ with python3.12dist(scikit-learn) >= 1.3.2)
    (python3.12dist(sport-activities-features) < 0.4~~ with python3.12dist(sport-activities-features) >= 0.3.18)
    python(abi)



Provides
--------
python3-arm-preprocessing:
    python-arm-preprocessing
    python3-arm-preprocessing
    python3.12-arm-preprocessing
    python3.12dist(arm-preprocessing)
    python3dist(arm-preprocessing)



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/iztok/2269698-python-arm-preprocessing/srpm/python-arm-preprocessing.spec	2024-03-18 09:39:56.922526187 +0100
+++ /home/iztok/2269698-python-arm-preprocessing/srpm-unpacked/python-arm-preprocessing.spec	2024-03-14 01:00:00.000000000 +0100
@@ -1,2 +1,12 @@
+## START: Set by rpmautospec
+## (rpmautospec version 0.6.3)
+## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
+%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
+    release_number = 1;
+    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
+
 %global pypi_name arm-preprocessing
 %global forgeurl https://github.com/firefly-cpp/arm-preprocessing
@@ -62,3 +72,6 @@
 
 %changelog
-%autochangelog
+## START: Generated by rpmautospec
+* Thu Mar 14 2024 Sandro <devel> - 0.2.1-1
+- Initial package
+## END: Generated by rpmautospec


Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2269698
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: C/C++, Ocaml, Java, fonts, Haskell, SugarActivity, R, PHP, Perl
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 4 Iztok Fister Jr. 2024-03-18 09:47:14 UTC
According to the review, no special blockers are identified. Replace the current description with "Data preprocessing for Association Rule Mining". Other rpmlint errors are false positives. Please also check one diff discrepancy. Thanks for working on this.

Comment 5 Sandro 2024-03-18 10:17:57 UTC
(In reply to Iztok Fister Jr. from comment #4)
> According to the review, no special blockers are identified. Replace the
> current description with "Data preprocessing for Association Rule Mining".

Done.

> Other rpmlint errors are false positives. Please also check one diff
> discrepancy. Thanks for working on this.

The "discrepancy" would be due to the use of rpmautospec, which is not handled well by fedora-review.

Would you like updated spec file and SRPM URLs?

Comment 6 Iztok Fister Jr. 2024-03-18 11:13:35 UTC
PACKAGE APPROVED! Thanks.

Comment 7 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2024-03-18 11:48:57 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-arm-preprocessing

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2024-03-18 12:02:41 UTC
FEDORA-2024-2e92588103 (python-arm-preprocessing-0.2.1-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-2e92588103

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2024-03-18 12:05:18 UTC
FEDORA-2024-2e92588103 (python-arm-preprocessing-0.2.1-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 10 Sandro 2024-03-18 12:10:57 UTC
F40- will follow once `python-sport-activities-features` has reached stable in those branches.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.