Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/python-pytest-dependency.spec SRPM URL: https://mikel.olasagasti.info/tmp/fedora/python-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.fc40.src.rpm Description: This module is a plugin for the popular Python testing framework pytest. It manages dependencies of tests: you may mark some tests as dependent from other tests. These tests will then be skipped if any of the dependencies did fail or has been skipped. Fedora Account System Username: mikelo2
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/7494019 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2283312-python-pytest-dependency/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/07494019-python-pytest-dependency/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.
I need this for one of my packages so I am going to review it.
One small mostly cosmetic issue. You accidentally made a copy-paste error in your package's description field - "ackage provides a pytest plugin ...". I believe you meant something like "This package". Please fix before uploading. Another one friendly request - could you please request f39 and f40 branches for this package? I can't see any issues so here is my formal Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package must not depend on deprecated() packages. Note: python3-pytest7 is deprecated, you must not depend on it. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/deprecating-packages/ ===== 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 (Apache-2.0). [x]: Package owns all directories that it creates. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package does not contain desktop file (not a GUI application). [-]: No development files. [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. [-]: The package is not a rename of another package. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package does not contain systemd file(s). [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 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 7392 bytes in 2 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. [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). [?]: I did not test if the package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged (0.6.0). [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources are not verified with gpgverify (upstream does not publish signatures). [?]: I did not test if the package compiles and builds into binary rpms on all supported architectures. Noarch package anyway. [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-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.fc42.noarch.rpm python-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.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/tmpw0aigyes')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python-pytest-dependency.src: E: spelling-error ('ackage', '%description -l en_US ackage -> package') python3-pytest-dependency.noarch: E: spelling-error ('ackage', '%description -l en_US ackage -> package') ==================================================================================================== 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings, 9 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 1.7 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-pytest-dependency.noarch: E: spelling-error ('ackage', '%description -l en_US ackage -> package') 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 0 warnings, 5 filtered, 1 badness; has taken 0.3 s ^^^ See my note above. Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/pytest-dependency/pytest-dependency-0.6.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 934b0e6a39d95995062c193f7eaeed8a8ffa06ff1bcef4b62b0dc74a708bacc1 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 934b0e6a39d95995062c193f7eaeed8a8ffa06ff1bcef4b62b0dc74a708bacc1 Requires -------- python3-pytest-dependency (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3.13dist(pytest) python3.13dist(setuptools) Provides -------- python3-pytest-dependency: python-pytest-dependency python3-pytest-dependency python3.13-pytest-dependency python3.13dist(pytest-dependency) python3dist(pytest-dependency) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2283312 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Python, Generic Disabled plugins: Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, Java, R, fonts, SugarActivity, C/C++, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Please fix the only mostly cosmetic error in a description field. This package is ================ === APPROVED === ================
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pytest-dependency
FEDORA-2024-91fe1f7073 (python-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-91fe1f7073
FEDORA-2024-34a466c9b6 (python-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-34a466c9b6
Thanks for the review! The description issue was a leftover that I corrected before pushing. Builds for F42 and F41 are pending for +30min https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/?packages=python-pytest-dependency I guess they'll hit stable soon. For F40 and F39 I created a side-tag for each and built codespell also. If you want to build against the side-tags they would be f40-build-side-94964 and f39-build-side-94966 or if you can wait they should be available in a week.
FEDORA-2024-34a466c9b6 (python-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2024-91fe1f7073 (python-pytest-dependency-0.6.0-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.