Spec URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/python-exceptiongroup.spec SRPM URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/python-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc42.src.rpm Description: This is a backport of the BaseExceptionGroup and ExceptionGroup classes from Python 3.11. Fedora Account System Username: pnemade
This package built on koji: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=136138033
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9436318 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2388953-python-exceptiongroup/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09436318-python-exceptiongroup/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 Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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. [!]: 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 and/or Python Software Foundation License 2.0", "*No copyright* MIT License". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-exceptiongroup/2388953-python- exceptiongroup/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, /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages [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. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: 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 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: [-]: 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: [ ]: 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). [ ]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-exceptiongroup , python3-exceptiongroup+test [ ]: 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]: 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-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm python3-exceptiongroup+test-1.3.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm python-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-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/tmpwr51ryht')] checks: 32, packages: 3 python-exceptiongroup.src: E: spelling-error ('Backport', 'Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker') python-exceptiongroup.src: E: spelling-error ('backport', '%description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Backport', 'Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('backport', '%description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings, 26 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.7 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: 2 python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Backport', 'Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('backport', '%description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 1 warnings, 22 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.2 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/e/exceptiongroup/exceptiongroup-1.3.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b241f5885f560bc56a59ee63ca4c6a8bfa46ae4ad651af316d4e81817bb9fd88 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b241f5885f560bc56a59ee63ca4c6a8bfa46ae4ad651af316d4e81817bb9fd88 Requires -------- python3-exceptiongroup (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-exceptiongroup+test (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-exceptiongroup python3.14dist(pytest) Provides -------- python3-exceptiongroup: python-exceptiongroup python3-exceptiongroup python3.14-exceptiongroup python3.14dist(exceptiongroup) python3dist(exceptiongroup) python3-exceptiongroup+test: python-exceptiongroup+test python3-exceptiongroup+test python3.14-exceptiongroup+test python3.14dist(exceptiongroup[test]) python3dist(exceptiongroup[test]) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-exceptiongroup/2388953-python-exceptiongroup/srpm/python-exceptiongroup.spec 2025-08-17 10:02:22.407428270 +0300 +++ /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-exceptiongroup/2388953-python-exceptiongroup/srpm-unpacked/python-exceptiongroup.spec 2025-08-16 03:00:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -29,7 +29,10 @@ %autosetup -p1 -n exceptiongroup-%{version} + %generate_buildrequires +# Keep only those extras which you actually want to package or use during tests %pyproject_buildrequires -x test + %build %pyproject_wheel Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2388953 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: PHP, R, SugarActivity, Perl, C/C++, Haskell, fonts, Java, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) Should Python Software Foundation license be indicated in the spec file? https://github.com/agronholm/exceptiongroup/blob/main/LICENSE b) Can tests be run with Pytest? See https://github.com/agronholm/exceptiongroup/blob/main/.github/workflows/test.yml#L52 c) Test subpackage is probably not needed
Updated now. Please check again below links. Spec URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/python-exceptiongroup.spec SRPM URL: https://pnemade.fedorapeople.org/python-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc42.src.rpm
Created attachment 2103954 [details] The .spec file difference from Copr build 9436318 to 9438507
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9438507 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2388953-python-exceptiongroup/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09438507-python-exceptiongroup/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 Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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 and/or Python Software Foundation License 2.0", "*No copyright* MIT License". 17 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-exceptiongroup/2388953-python- exceptiongroup/licensecheck.txt [ ]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14, /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages [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 5829 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. [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. [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. [ ]: %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-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm python-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc43.src.rpm ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.7.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.13/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-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/tmpm_agh1za')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python-exceptiongroup.src: E: spelling-error ('Backport', 'Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker') python-exceptiongroup.src: E: spelling-error ('backport', '%description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Backport', 'Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('backport', '%description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker') 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 0 warnings, 7 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 0.6 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-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Backport', 'Summary(en_US) Backport -> Back port, Back-port, Backpacker') python3-exceptiongroup.noarch: E: spelling-error ('backport', '%description -l en_US backport -> back port, back-port, backpacker') 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings, 3 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/e/exceptiongroup/exceptiongroup-1.3.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b241f5885f560bc56a59ee63ca4c6a8bfa46ae4ad651af316d4e81817bb9fd88 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b241f5885f560bc56a59ee63ca4c6a8bfa46ae4ad651af316d4e81817bb9fd88 Requires -------- python3-exceptiongroup (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python3-exceptiongroup: python-exceptiongroup python3-exceptiongroup python3.14-exceptiongroup python3.14dist(exceptiongroup) python3dist(exceptiongroup) Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2388953 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: SugarActivity, Java, C/C++, Haskell, Ocaml, R, fonts, Perl, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) Please remove: %license LICENSE the line %pyproject_save_files -l exceptiongroup will ensure that if the license is not packaged with metadata, an error will be raised. $ rpm -qL python3-exceptiongroup-1.3.0-1.fc43.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.14/site-packages/exceptiongroup-1.3.0.dist-info/licenses/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/python3-exceptiongroup/LICENSE b) May want to comment on why tests are excluded and perhaps report upstream c) Consider indicating that _formatting.py is under two licenses: https://github.com/agronholm/exceptiongroup/blob/main/src/exceptiongroup/_formatting.py All other packaged files seem to be MIT, though maybe upstream can clarify. Not a blocker. d) Approved, please fix (a) before import. e) Review of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2389098 would be appreciated if time allows.
Thank you for the quick package review. Updated the SPEC with suggested changes at same place. I have started package review -> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2389098
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-exceptiongroup