Bug 2354862 - Review Request: koji-image-builder - Koji integration plugins for image-builder
Summary: Review Request: koji-image-builder - Koji integration plugins for image-builder
Keywords:
Status: RELEASE_PENDING
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ondřej Budai
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-03-25 14:16 UTC by Simon de Vlieger
Modified: 2025-04-03 10:44 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: ---
Embargoed:
obudai: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8818881 to 8818965 (460 bytes, patch)
2025-03-25 14:49 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8818965 to 8852724 (3.56 KB, patch)
2025-04-02 14:27 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff

Description Simon de Vlieger 2025-03-25 14:16:15 UTC
Spec URL: https://supakeen.fedorapeople.org/for-review/koji-image-builder.spec
SRPM URL: https://supakeen.fedorapeople.org/for-review/koji-image-builder-1-6.fc43.src.rpm
Description: Koji integration plugins for image-builder
Fedora Account System Username: supakeen

This package provides koji integration for image-builder. It provides a cli, hub, and builder plugin which gives users hosting koji the ability to enable the plugin and users who have permissions to trigger builds on that koji instance.

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-03-25 14:30:30 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8818881
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2354862-koji-image-builder/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08818881-koji-image-builder/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Upstream MD5sum check error, diff is in /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/koji-image-builder/diff.txt
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/

Please know that there can be false-positives.

---
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 Simon de Vlieger 2025-03-25 14:35:41 UTC
Spec URL: https://supakeen.fedorapeople.org/for-review/koji-image-builder.spec
SRPM URL: https://supakeen.fedorapeople.org/for-review/koji-image-builder-1-1.fc43.src.rpm

Let's re-do that COPR build; it is correct that the MD5sum is likely different as I hadn't pushed the tag. This also corrected the -release number that %autorelease generated.

Comment 3 Fedora Review Service 2025-03-25 14:49:31 UTC
Created attachment 2081945 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8818881 to 8818965

Comment 4 Fedora Review Service 2025-03-25 14:49:33 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8818965
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2354862-koji-image-builder/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08818965-koji-image-builder/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 5 Ondřej Budai 2025-04-02 11:53:22 UTC
I found the following issues during the review, otherwise the package LGTM. Happy to approve when these items get fixed.

The changelog version is wrong, please fix it when importing the spec file into dist-git.

---

I think you also need to add these runtime deps:
- koji-image-builder-builder on koji-builder-plugins
- koji-image-builder-hub on koji-hub-plugins
- koji-image-builder-cli on python3-koji-cli-plugins

This is needed because this package is installing files into directories owned by these packages, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_the_directory_is_also_owned_by_a_package_implementing_required_functionality_of_your_package

---

%pytest macro should be used for invoking tests, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_pytest

---

%pychached %{_prefix}/lib/koji-hub-plugins/image_builder.py
instead of 
%{_prefix}/lib/koji-hub-plugins/__pycache__/image_builder.*

feels slightly cleaner, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_source_files_and_bytecode_cache

---

%{__python3} should be replaced with %{python3}

---

The guidelines recommend using virtual provides like python3dist(pytest) and python3dist(pytest-mock) for test dependencies, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_test_dependencies_2

Comment 6 Simon de Vlieger 2025-04-02 14:18:11 UTC
Spec URL: https://supakeen.fedorapeople.org/for-review/koji-image-builder/3/koji-image-builder.spec
SRPM URL: https://supakeen.fedorapeople.org/for-review/koji-image-builder/3/koji-image-builder-1-1.fc43.src.rpm

Thanks for the review! I've addressed all the comments with the exception of the `%pycached`
macro, I applied it to the file(s) installed into `%{python3_sitelib}` but it seems to not work
for files in other locations as my RPM build gives duplicate file warnings when I do that.

I've also done the changelog version fix.

Comment 7 Fedora Review Service 2025-04-02 14:27:17 UTC
Created attachment 2083108 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 8818965 to 8852724

Comment 8 Fedora Review Service 2025-04-02 14:27:20 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/8852724
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2354862-koji-image-builder/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/08852724-koji-image-builder/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 9 Ondřej Budai 2025-04-03 10:18:23 UTC
Thank you for the changes, LGTM!

There's a SHA mismatch for the sources, but I suppose this will get fixed when packit takes care of the releases. (I suppose you are going to use it as all other osbuild/* packages do).

Package Review
==============

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



===== MUST items =====

Generic:
[ ]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
     one supported primary architecture.
     Note: Using prebuilt packages
[ ]: 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", "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0". 67
     files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/koji-image-builder/licensecheck.txt
[ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[ ]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-
     packages/koji_cli_plugins/__pycache__, /usr/lib/koji-hub-
     plugins/__pycache__, /usr/lib/python3.13/site-
     packages/koji_cli_plugins, /usr/lib/koji-hub-plugins,
     /usr/lib/python3.13, /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages
[ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[ ]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[ ]: 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
[ ]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[ ]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
     names).
[ ]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[ ]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[ ]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[ ]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
     Provides are present.
[ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[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 1655 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[ ]: 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
[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:
[!]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate
     file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.
[ ]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments).
[ ]: Package functions as described.
[ ]: Latest version is packaged.
[ ]: 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.
[ ]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[ ]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
     files.
[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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
[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: Bad spec filename: /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/koji-image-
     builder/srpm-unpacked/koji-image-builder.spec
     See: (this test has no URL)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: No rpmlint messages.


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: koji-image-builder-1-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          koji-image-builder-hub-1-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          koji-image-builder-builder-1-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          koji-image-builder-cli-1-1.fc43.noarch.rpm
          koji-image-builder-1-1.fc43.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.6.1
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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/tmpzsu40jlc')]
checks: 32, packages: 5

koji-image-builder-builder.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
koji-image-builder-hub.noarch: W: only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
koji-image-builder-builder.noarch: W: no-documentation
koji-image-builder-cli.noarch: W: no-documentation
koji-image-builder-hub.noarch: W: no-documentation
 5 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 5 warnings, 31 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s 




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "koji-image-builder".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "koji-image-builder-cli".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "koji-image-builder-builder".
(none): E: there is no installed rpm "koji-image-builder-hub".
There are no files to process nor additional arguments.
Nothing to do, aborting.
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.7.0
configuration:
    /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.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: 4

 0 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/osbuild/koji-image-builder/archive/v1/koji-image-builder-1.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : 953b4ceee90dda654f16d961df4fb90a16a2c584490864d682dd6222afb2ca2a
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 13940d467e8823e7525279bf759cc26982b27a1fe4d5bf1f292b8a597988dd6d
However, diff -r shows no differences


Requires
--------
koji-image-builder (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):

koji-image-builder-hub (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    koji-hub
    koji-hub-plugins
    koji-image-builder
    python3-jsonschema

koji-image-builder-builder (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    koji-builder
    koji-builder-plugins
    koji-image-builder

koji-image-builder-cli (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    koji-cli
    koji-cli-plugins
    koji-image-builder
    python(abi)



Provides
--------
koji-image-builder:
    koji-image-builder

koji-image-builder-hub:
    koji-image-builder-hub

koji-image-builder-builder:
    koji-image-builder-builder

koji-image-builder-cli:
    koji-image-builder-cli



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name koji-image-builder --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Shell-api, Python, Generic
Disabled plugins: PHP, C/C++, Haskell, Ocaml, SugarActivity, Java, Perl, R, fonts
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 10 Simon de Vlieger 2025-04-03 10:43:05 UTC
Thanks! Yes, this package will end up being managed by PackIt as well.

Comment 11 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2025-04-03 10:44:01 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/koji-image-builder


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