spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml-1.7.6-1.fc42.src.rpm description: Super Simple utility to convert a python dictionary into an xml string. fas: fed500 Reproducible: Always
There were two minor issues I found, but since they are both in spec-file comments, I approved the package as-is. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== Issues ===== - Please remove this comment: # Fill in the actual package description to submit package to Fedora - The "tests" extra is the kind of extra that we normally would not package as a metapackage (python3-dict2xml+tests) even if its dependencies were satisfiable, because it is not useful for other packages to depend on; see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_handling_extras. Please remove this: # Need python-noseofyeti #pyproject_extras_subpkg -n python3-dict2xml tests ===== 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: "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2373132-python- dict2xml/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.14 (This diagnostic is spurious; python3-libs owns these.) [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. $ rpm -qL -p results/python3-dict2xml-1.7.6-1.fc43.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/dict2xml-1.7.6.dist-info/licenses/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 0 bytes in 0 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). [?]: Package functions as described. We are not able to run the tests without packaging additional dependencies. [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. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=134181700 [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. Import-only smoke tests pass; a missing dependency prevents running the actual tests. It would be nice to be able to run these, but it does not block the review. [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-dict2xml-1.7.6-1.fc43.noarch.rpm python-dict2xml-1.7.6-1.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpvwdygi11')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python3-dict2xml.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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: 1 python3-dict2xml.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/d/dict2xml/dict2xml-1.7.6.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 3e4811f4ef7fca86dede6acf382268ff9bc5735a4aa0e21b465f6eb0c4e81732 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 3e4811f4ef7fca86dede6acf382268ff9bc5735a4aa0e21b465f6eb0c4e81732 Requires -------- python3-dict2xml (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python3-dict2xml: python-dict2xml python3-dict2xml python3.14-dict2xml python3.14dist(dict2xml) python3dist(dict2xml) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2373132 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: C/C++, Java, fonts, SugarActivity, PHP, R, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Version 1.7.7 has been released since the original approval. Could you please update the submission? Also, something I missed the first time: could you please change the URL from http:// to https:// ?
Thanks. Updated. spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc42.src.rpm
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9511322 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2373132-python-dict2xml/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09511322-python-dict2xml/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.
Thank you. The minor comment adjustments requested in the first review are still needed. Also, the noseofyeti test dependency was removed upstream, so you can and should run the tests. Package Review ============== --- srpm-unpacked/python-dict2xml.spec 2025-09-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100 +++ rebuild/python-dict2xml.spec 2025-09-01 08:11:03.867078921 +0100 @@ -10,6 +10,9 @@ BuildArch: noarch BuildRequires: python3-devel +# The tests extra pins a precise version of pytest, which we cannot respect; we +# therefore simply list test dependencies manually. +BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pytest} # Fill in the actual package description to submit package to Fedora %global _description %{expand: @@ -22,16 +25,13 @@ %description -n python3-dict2xml %_description -# Need python-noseofyeti -#pyproject_extras_subpkg -n python3-dict2xml tests - %prep %autosetup -p1 -n dict2xml-%{version} %generate_buildrequires -%pyproject_buildrequires #-x tests +%pyproject_buildrequires %build @@ -45,8 +45,8 @@ %check %pyproject_check_import -# python-noseofyeti is not yet packaged -# pytest +%pytest + %files -n python3-dict2xml -f %{pyproject_files} Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== Issues ===== - Please remove this comment: # Fill in the actual package description to submit package to Fedora - The "tests" extra is the kind of extra that we normally would not package as a metapackage (python3-dict2xml+tests) even if its dependencies were satisfiable, because it is not useful for other packages to depend on; see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_handling_extras. Please remove this: # Need python-noseofyeti #pyproject_extras_subpkg -n python3-dict2xml tests Furthermore, the tests no longer require noseofyeti as of 1.7.7, so you can and should run them. Do not use the tests extra to generate dependencies, because it pins an exact version of pytest. -%pyproject_buildrequires #-x tests +%pyproject_buildrequires You *could* patch pyproject.toml to loosen the version bound, but since pytest is now the only test dependency, it’s easier to simply list test dependencies manually: # The tests extra pins a precise version of pytest, which we cannot respect; we # therefore simply list test dependencies manually. BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pytest} Now you can amend the %check section to look like this: %check %pyproject_check_import %pytest ===== 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: "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2373132-python- dict2xml/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.14 (This diagnostic is spurious; python3-libs owns these.) [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 0 bytes in 0 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). [x]: Package functions as described. Tests would pass if they were run. [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. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. The tests can and should be run in %check. [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-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc44.noarch.rpm python-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpns0euk6k')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python3-dict2xml.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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: 1 python3-dict2xml.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/d/dict2xml/dict2xml-1.7.7.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ae47873a584921430d3b74f0f63db98b59f6cafc038b14619c65e83cf717608f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ae47873a584921430d3b74f0f63db98b59f6cafc038b14619c65e83cf717608f Requires -------- python3-dict2xml (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python3-dict2xml: python-dict2xml python3-dict2xml python3.14-dict2xml python3.14dist(dict2xml) python3dist(dict2xml) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2373132 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: C/C++, Perl, Haskell, Java, PHP, Ocaml, fonts, SugarActivity, R Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
> - Please remove this comment: > > # Fill in the actual package description to submit package to Fedora Done > - The "tests" extra is the kind of extra that we normally would not package as > a metapackage (python3-dict2xml+tests) even if its dependencies were > satisfiable, because it is not useful for other packages to depend on; see > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_handling_extras. > Please remove this: > # Need python-noseofyeti > #pyproject_extras_subpkg -n python3-dict2xml tests > Furthermore, the tests no longer require noseofyeti as of 1.7.7, so you can > and should run them. Do not use the tests extra to generate dependencies, > because it pins an exact version of pytest. > > -%pyproject_buildrequires #-x tests > +%pyproject_buildrequires > > You *could* patch pyproject.toml to loosen the version bound, but since > pytest is now the only test dependency, it’s easier to simply list test > dependencies manually: > > # The tests extra pins a precise version of pytest, which we cannot respect; we > # therefore simply list test dependencies manually. > BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pytest} > > Now you can amend the %check section to look like this: > > %check > %pyproject_check_import > %pytest Done Updated. spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc42.src.rpm
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9635565 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2373132-python-dict2xml/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09635565-python-dict2xml/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.
(In reply to Ben Beasley from comment #5) > […] Also, the noseofyeti test dependency was removed upstream, so > you can and should run the tests. The latest submission still doesn’t run the tests. Please see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2373132#c5, which demonstrates running the tests.
Sorry, must have uploaded incorrect files. Updated files. spec: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml.spec srpm: https://fed500.fedorapeople.org/python-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc42.src.rpm
Created attachment 2108228 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9635565 to 9636435
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9636435 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2373132-python-dict2xml/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09636435-python-dict2xml/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.
Package APPROVED. Consider adding README.rst as documentation. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== Issues ===== - You should package README.rst as documentation: %doc README.rst This does not block approval. ===== 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: "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License", "Unknown or generated". 16 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/fedora/review/2373132-python- dict2xml/20251002/2373132-python-dict2xml/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14, /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages OK: spurious diagnostics; python3-libs owns these. [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. [x]: 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 0 bytes in 0 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). [x]: Package functions as described. (Tests pass.) [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. https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=137705020 [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-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc44.noarch.rpm python-dict2xml-1.7.7-1.fc44.src.rpm ============================ 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmpbs8xj41q')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python3-dict2xml.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.14/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: 1 python3-dict2xml.noarch: W: no-documentation 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/d/dict2xml/dict2xml-1.7.7.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : ae47873a584921430d3b74f0f63db98b59f6cafc038b14619c65e83cf717608f CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : ae47873a584921430d3b74f0f63db98b59f6cafc038b14619c65e83cf717608f Requires -------- python3-dict2xml (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python3-dict2xml: python-dict2xml python3-dict2xml python3.14-dict2xml python3.14dist(dict2xml) python3dist(dict2xml) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2373132 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Python, Shell-api, Generic Disabled plugins: PHP, Java, R, Perl, fonts, C/C++, Haskell, Ocaml, SugarActivity Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH