Bug 2386481 - Review Request: bidscoin - Converts and organises raw MRI data-sets according to BIDS
Summary: Review Request: bidscoin - Converts and organises raw MRI data-sets according...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD)
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: fedora-neuro, NeuroFedora
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-08-05 03:57 UTC by Ben Beasley
Modified: 2025-11-15 01:43 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-11-06 12:06:37 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:
sanjay.ankur: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Ben Beasley 2025-08-05 03:57:49 UTC
Spec URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/bidscoin.spec
SRPM URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc42.src.rpm

Description:

BIDScoin is a user-friendly Python application suite that converts (“coins”)
source-level (raw) neuroimaging data sets to standardized data sets that are
organized according to the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) specification.
Rather than depending on complex programmatic logic for source data-type
identification, BIDScoin uses a mapping approach to discover the different
source data types in your repository and convert them into BIDS data types.
Different runs of source data are uniquely identified by their file system
properties (e.g. file name or size) and by their attributes (e.g. ProtocolName
from the DICOM header). Mapping information can be pre-specified (e.g. per
site), allowing BIDScoin to make intelligent first suggestions on how to
classify and convert the data. While this command-line procedure exploits all
information available on disk, BIDScoin offers a Graphical User Interface (GUI)
for researchers to check and edit these mappings -- bringing in the missing
knowledge that often exists in their heads only. This interactive step can also
be skipped for employment in fully automated dataflow pipelines.

BIDScoin requires no programming knowledge in order to use it, but users can
use regular expressions and plug-ins to further enhance BIDScoin's power and
flexibility, and readily handle a wide variety of source data types.

Fedora Account System Username: music

This will be a neuro-sig package; it would close https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issue/500.

Comment 1 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2025-10-29 17:14:41 UTC
Ah, I orphaned duecredit, but it's required by this one. Taking it up again and building for rawhide so that we can proceed here.

Comment 2 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2025-11-06 11:01:36 UTC
Looks great. XXX APPROVED XXX

(My only query was: do we exclude 32bit arches already, as it's a leaf package?)


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

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


Issues:
=======
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel


===== 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", "GNU General Public License v3.0 or
     later", "*No copyright* GNU General Public License, Version 3", "*No
     copyright* GNU General Public License v3.0 or later". 404 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/asinha/dump/fedora-reviews/2386481-bidscoin/licensecheck.txt
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
     Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14/site-
     packages, /usr/lib/python3.14
[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.
^
If it's a leaf package, should we already exclude ix86? (we still doing that?)

[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 5447 bytes in 1 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]: 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.
^
imports and tests pass

[x]: 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.
[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]: 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:
[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: bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          bidscoin+dcm2niix2bids-4.6.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          bidscoin+spec2nii2bids-4.6.2-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc44.src.rpm
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
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
rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp8jtl4o38')]
checks: 32, packages: 4

bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('organises', 'Summary(en_US) organises -> organists, organisms, organizes')
bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('neuroimaging', '%description -l en_US neuroimaging -> neurosurgical')
bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('pre', '%description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee')
bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('dataflow', '%description -l en_US dataflow -> data flow, data-flow, contraflow')
bidscoin.src: E: spelling-error ('organises', 'Summary(en_US) organises -> organists, organisms, organizes')
bidscoin.src: E: spelling-error ('neuroimaging', '%description -l en_US neuroimaging -> neurosurgical')
bidscoin.src: E: spelling-error ('pre', '%description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee')
bidscoin.src: E: spelling-error ('dataflow', '%description -l en_US dataflow -> data flow, data-flow, contraflow')
bidscoin+dcm2niix2bids.noarch: W: no-documentation
bidscoin+spec2nii2bids.noarch: W: no-documentation
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/objects/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/objects/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/raw/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/objects/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/raw/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/raw/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/__init__.py
 4 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 8 warnings, 23 filtered, 8 badness; has taken 0.8 s 




Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ rpmlint session starts ============================
rpmlint: 2.8.0
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: 3

bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('organises', 'Summary(en_US) organises -> organists, organisms, organizes')
bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('neuroimaging', '%description -l en_US neuroimaging -> neurosurgical')
bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('pre', '%description -l en_US pre -> per, ore, pee')
bidscoin.noarch: E: spelling-error ('dataflow', '%description -l en_US dataflow -> data flow, data-flow, contraflow')
bidscoin+spec2nii2bids.noarch: W: no-documentation
bidscoin+dcm2niix2bids.noarch: W: no-documentation
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/objects/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/objects/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/raw/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/objects/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/raw/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/__init__.py
bidscoin.noarch: W: cross-directory-hard-link /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/raw/__init__.py /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/bidscoin/schema/rules/files/__init__.py
 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 8 warnings, 19 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.2 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/Donders-Institute/bidscoin/archive/4.6.2/bidscoin-4.6.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : fb7301cc01454a57e4e8df0c733f5139674ad4fd02bb13dc7479de9a25809a70
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : fb7301cc01454a57e4e8df0c733f5139674ad4fd02bb13dc7479de9a25809a70


Requires
--------
bidscoin (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    /usr/bin/python3
    python(abi)
    python3.14dist(bids-validator)
    python3.14dist(bidsschematools)
    python3.14dist(duecredit)
    python3.14dist(jsonschema)
    python3.14dist(matplotlib)
    python3.14dist(multiecho)
    python3.14dist(nibabel)
    python3.14dist(numpy)
    python3.14dist(pandas)
    python3.14dist(pydicom)
    python3.14dist(pyqt6)
    python3.14dist(python-dateutil)
    python3.14dist(pyyaml)
    python3.14dist(rich)

bidscoin+dcm2niix2bids (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    bidscoin
    python(abi)
    python3.14dist(dcm2niix)

bidscoin+spec2nii2bids (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    bidscoin
    python(abi)
    python3.14dist(spec2nii)



Provides
--------
bidscoin:
    bidscoin
    python3.14dist(bidscoin)
    python3dist(bidscoin)

bidscoin+dcm2niix2bids:
    bidscoin+dcm2niix2bids
    python3.14dist(bidscoin[dcm2niix2bids])
    python3dist(bidscoin[dcm2niix2bids])

bidscoin+spec2nii2bids:
    bidscoin+spec2nii2bids
    python3.14dist(bidscoin[spec2nii2bids])
    python3dist(bidscoin[spec2nii2bids])



Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2386481
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: fonts, SugarActivity, C/C++, R, Java, Perl, PHP, Haskell, Ocaml
Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH

Comment 3 Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) 2025-11-06 11:02:44 UTC
- Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
^
not sure why this is an issue, but this is fine for this package.

Comment 4 Ben Beasley 2025-11-06 11:08:10 UTC
(In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #3)
> - Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
> ^
> not sure why this is an issue, but this is fine for this package.

It’s implied by "BuildSystem: pyproject"[1]; even "%pyproject_buildrequires" suffices[2].

[1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-absl-py/pull-request/4#comment-211814
[2] https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/pull-request/1379

----

> (My only query was: do we exclude 32bit arches already, as it's a leaf package?)

> [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
> ^
> If it's a leaf package, should we already exclude ix86? (we still doing that?)

It’s a good idea to ExcludeArch: %{ix86} on new arched leaves. It’s not necessary on noarch packages like this one, because noarch packages are now never built on i686.

----

Thank you for the review!

Comment 5 Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions 2025-11-06 11:08:42 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/bidscoin

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2025-11-06 12:04:13 UTC
FEDORA-2025-75a20beb95 (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-75a20beb95

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2025-11-06 12:06:37 UTC
FEDORA-2025-75a20beb95 (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2025-11-06 12:50:36 UTC
FEDORA-2025-34f7708987 (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc43) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 43.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-34f7708987

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2025-11-06 22:09:15 UTC
FEDORA-2025-65b33f74df (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc42) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 42.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-65b33f74df

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2025-11-06 22:33:51 UTC
FEDORA-2025-7ff323ad1c (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc41) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 41.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-7ff323ad1c

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2025-11-07 02:13:19 UTC
FEDORA-2025-34f7708987 has been pushed to the Fedora 43 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-34f7708987 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-34f7708987

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2025-11-07 03:01:05 UTC
FEDORA-2025-65b33f74df has been pushed to the Fedora 42 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-65b33f74df \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-65b33f74df

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2025-11-07 05:07:27 UTC
FEDORA-2025-7ff323ad1c has been pushed to the Fedora 41 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2025-7ff323ad1c \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2025-7ff323ad1c

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2025-11-15 00:51:36 UTC
FEDORA-2025-34f7708987 (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc43) has been pushed to the Fedora 43 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2025-11-15 01:34:02 UTC
FEDORA-2025-65b33f74df (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc42) has been pushed to the Fedora 42 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2025-11-15 01:43:52 UTC
FEDORA-2025-7ff323ad1c (bidscoin-4.6.2-1.fc41) has been pushed to the Fedora 41 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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