Bug 2414245 - Review Request: python-plumbum - Shell combinators library
Summary: Review Request: python-plumbum - Shell combinators library
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Terje Rosten
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL: https://github.com/tomerfiliba/plumbum
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 2393822
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2025-11-11 20:25 UTC by W. Michael Petullo
Modified: 2025-11-18 14:27 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2025-11-18 14:27:36 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
terjeros: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9788130 to 9793069 (476 bytes, patch)
2025-11-13 02:23 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9793069 to 9795264 (246 bytes, patch)
2025-11-13 14:41 UTC, Fedora Review Service
no flags Details | Diff

Description W. Michael Petullo 2025-11-11 20:25:16 UTC
Spec URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-plumbum.spec
SRPM URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-plumbum-1.10.0-1.fc43.src.rpm

Description: Ever wished the wrist-handiness of shell scripts be put into a real programming language? Say hello to Plumbum Shell Combinators. Plumbum (Latin for lead, which was used to create pipes back in the day) is a small yet feature-rich library for shell script-like programs in Python. The motto of the library is "Never write shell scripts again", and thus it attempts to mimic the shell syntax ("shell combinators") where it makes sense, while keeping it all pythonic and cross-platform.

Fedora Account System Username: mikep

Maxwell G retired this package in September. My python3-rpyc requires python-plumbum, so I am willing to maintain python-plumbum. I updated the earlier .spec file so that it makes use of the new Python macros, updated the version, and dropped the Python 2 conditionals.

Comment 1 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-11 20:26:49 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9788130
(failed)

Build log:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2414245-python-plumbum/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09788130-python-plumbum/builder-live.log.gz

Please make sure the package builds successfully at least for Fedora Rawhide.

- If the build failed for unrelated reasons (e.g. temporary network
  unavailability), please ignore it.
- If the build failed because of missing BuildRequires, please make sure they
  are listed in the "Depends On" field


---
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 Terje Rosten 2025-11-12 09:47:12 UTC
Seems like you need to add python module psutil to buildreqs

Comment 3 W. Michael Petullo 2025-11-12 17:29:51 UTC
Spec URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-plumbum.spec
SRPM URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-plumbum-1.10.0-1.fc43.src.rpm

Terje is correct. I spent some time with mock and Copr, and I think I straightened out the dependencies needed to run the tests. The new links immediately above reflect these changes.

Comment 4 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-13 02:23:46 UTC
Created attachment 2114225 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9788130 to 9793069

Comment 5 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-13 02:23:48 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9793069
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2414245-python-plumbum/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09793069-python-plumbum/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversionned Python dependency found.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_dependencies
- A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-plumbum
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names

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 6 Terje Rosten 2025-11-13 11:15:32 UTC
> %global with_python2 0

Is this used for anything, can be removed?

> BuildRequires:  python-unversioned-command

This seems somewhat strange, what is the specific reason causing it to be required for tests?

Comment 7 W. Michael Petullo 2025-11-13 14:37:55 UTC
Spec URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-plumbum.spec
SRPM URL: https://www.flyn.org/SRPMS/python-plumbum-1.10.0-1.fc43.src.rpm

- Removed with_python2.
- Still requires /usr/bin/python (python-unversioned-command) for tests.

Comment 8 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-13 14:41:38 UTC
Created attachment 2114267 [details]
The .spec file difference from Copr build 9793069 to 9795264

Comment 9 Fedora Review Service 2025-11-13 14:41:40 UTC
Copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/9795264
(succeeded)

Review template:
https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2414245-python-plumbum/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09795264-python-plumbum/fedora-review/review.txt

Found issues:

- Unversionned Python dependency found.
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_dependencies
- A package with this name already exists. Please check https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-plumbum
  Read more: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names

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 10 Terje Rosten 2025-11-13 16:47:25 UTC
Package Review
==============

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

Issues:
=======
- 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.
  Note: Unversionned Python dependency found.
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/Python/#_dependencies

  Test wants "python" binary in $PATH, so this seems ok.
  
- Package does not use a name that already exists.
  Note: A package with this name already exists. Please check
  https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-plumbum
  See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-
  guidelines/Naming/#_conflicting_package_names

  Please remember to follow unretirement process.
  
===== 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.
[x]: Package must own 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 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.
[x]: 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 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 8000 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.
[ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python
[x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel
[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.
[x]: Latest version is packaged.
[x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream.
[x]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream
     publishes signatures.
[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]: 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-plumbum-1.10.0-1.fc44.noarch.rpm
          python-plumbum-1.10.0-1.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/tmpsmd4kol7')]
checks: 32, packages: 2

python-plumbum.src: E: spelling-error ('combinators', 'Summary(en_US) combinators -> combiners, combines, combats')
python-plumbum.src: E: spelling-error ('combinators', '%description -l en_US combinators -> combiners, combines, combats')
python-plumbum.src: E: spelling-error ('pythonic', '%description -l en_US pythonic -> Python, python, pythons')
python3-plumbum.noarch: E: spelling-error ('combinators', 'Summary(en_US) combinators -> combiners, combines, combats')
python3-plumbum.noarch: E: spelling-error ('combinators', '%description -l en_US combinators -> combiners, combines, combats')
python3-plumbum.noarch: E: spelling-error ('pythonic', '%description -l en_US pythonic -> Python, python, pythons')
python3-plumbum.noarch: W: python-leftover-require python3-six
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 6 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 6 badness; has taken 0.4 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: 1

python3-plumbum.noarch: E: spelling-error ('combinators', 'Summary(en_US) combinators -> combinations, combination, contaminators')
python3-plumbum.noarch: E: spelling-error ('combinators', '%description -l en_US combinators -> combinations, combination, contaminators')
python3-plumbum.noarch: E: spelling-error ('pythonic', '%description -l en_US pythonic -> python')
python3-plumbum.noarch: W: python-leftover-require python3-six
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 3 badness; has taken 0.2 s 


Source checksums
----------------
https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/p/plumbum/plumbum-1.10.0.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : f8cbf0ecec0b73ff4e349398b65112a9e3f9300e7dc019001217dcc148d5c97c
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f8cbf0ecec0b73ff4e349398b65112a9e3f9300e7dc019001217dcc148d5c97c


Requires
--------
python3-plumbum (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3-six

Provides
--------
python3-plumbum:
    python-plumbum
    python3-plumbum
    python3.14-plumbum
    python3.14dist(plumbum)
    python3dist(plumbum)


Summary:
========

a)
> package -n python3-%{pypi_name}
> Summary:        Shell combinators library
> Requires:       python3-six

 Remove this Requires: line before import.

b) remember the unretirement process, the rest is fine,

  package is APPROVED

Comment 11 W. Michael Petullo 2025-11-18 14:27:36 UTC
See https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=139039890.


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