Spec URL: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/samdoran/python-rich-rst/refs/heads/main/python-rich-rst.spec SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/samdoran/python-rich-rst/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/09936252-python-rich-rst/python-rich-rst-1.3.2-1.fc44.src.rpm Description: Allows rich to print a reStructuredText document in a rich format similar to rich.Markdown Fedora Account System Username: samdoran I'm a long time user, first time packager and looking for sponsors.
When you are looking for a sponsor, you should block FE-NEEDSPONSOR tracking bug. Added.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10010600 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2429568-python-rich-rst/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10010600-python-rich-rst/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.
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] License text included in package (LICENSE file) [X] Spec file is legible and written in American English [X] Spec file name matches the base package %{name} [X] Package successfully compiles and builds into binary RPMs on at least one primary architecture [X] BuildRequires list all build dependencies [X] Requires list all runtime dependencies (auto-generated via %pyproject_save_files) [X] Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception [X] Changelog in prescribed format [X] Package consistently uses macros [X] Package contains code, or permissible content [X] Large documentation files go in -doc subpackage (N/A - small package) [X] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages [X] All filenames are valid UTF-8 [X] Macros used instead of hard-coded paths MUST ITEMS - PYTHON SPECIFIC ================================================================================ [X] Package follows Python Packaging Guidelines [X] Uses %pyproject_* macros (wheel, install, save_files) [X] Uses %pyproject_buildrequires for automatic dependency generation [X] Binary package name follows python3-%{name} pattern [X] BuildArch: noarch is set (pure Python package) [X] %py3_shebang_fix used if needed (N/A if no scripts) [X] Uses %{python3_sitelib} or %{python3_sitearch} appropriately [X] %pyproject_save_files preserves license (-l flag used) SHOULD ITEMS - GENERIC ================================================================================ [X] Reviewer tests package builds in mock [X] Package builds in koji [X] Rpmlint output reviewed and addressed [X] Package follows Packaging Guidelines [X] Package contains man pages (N/A - no man pages) [X] Uses %autorelease and %autochangelog SHOULD ITEMS - PYTHON SPECIFIC ================================================================================ [X] Latest version packaged [X] Package uses PyPI as Source0 [X] %check section includes tests [X] Tests pass successfully [X] Documentation included in %doc SPECIFIC CHECKS FOR PYTHON-RICH-RST ================================================================================ SOURCE VERIFICATION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] Source tarball downloads correctly from PyPI [X] Source tarball contains expected files (rich_rst/ directory) [X] Version in spec matches PyPI version (1.3.2) [X] Source uses correct name format (rich_rst with underscore, not rich-rst) BUILDREQUIRES REVIEW -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] python3-devel included [X] python3-pytest explicitly listed (required - not in pyproject.toml) DEPENDENCIES -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] Runtime dependencies auto-detected correctly: [X] No manual Requires needed TESTS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] Verified test files exist in source tarball: Command: tar -tzf rich_rst-1.3.2.tar.gz | grep -E "test.*\.py$" FILES SECTION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] %{pyproject_files} includes all installed files [X] LICENSE handled by -l flag in %pyproject_save_files [X] README.md included as %doc [X] No files listed manually that are in %{pyproject_files} LICENSE VERIFICATION -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] LICENSE file contains MIT license text [X] Source files contain license headers or reference [X] License matches upstream declaration BUILD TESTING ================================================================================ LOCAL BUILD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Results: [X] Mock build successful [X] No rpmlint errors (warnings acceptable if justified) [X] RPM installs correctly KOJI BUILD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [X] Scratch build successful [X] All architectures build (noarch should be universal) Koji scratch build URL: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/samdoran/python-rich-rst/build/10009878/ FINAL CHECKS ================================================================================ [X] Package name appropriate and follows guidelines [X] Summary is concise and descriptive [X] Description provides useful information [X] URL points to correct upstream [X] All sections present and properly formatted [X] No obvious security concerns [X] Upstream active and maintained
I used this build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/samdoran/python-rich-rst/build/10009878/, and this specfile: https://github.com/samdoran/python-rich-rst/blob/main/python-rich-rst.spec sent by Sam Doran to me.
I made some changes to the spec file related to documentation. New Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/samdoran/python-rich-rst/build/10035997/
I see the flag for the docs extra was removed from %pyproject_buildrequires, but we should also remove this line: %pyproject_extras_subpkg -n python3-rich-rst docs The docs extra isn't useful to other packages and isn't user-facing. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_handling_extras Everything else in the package looks good to me, and I can approve and sponsor once that last fix goes in.
I remove that from the spec file. Spec file: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/samdoran/python-rich-rst/refs/heads/main/python-rich-rst.spec New copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/samdoran/python-rich-rst/build/10050410/
Fixed one last build failure. New copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/samdoran/python-rich-rst/build/10050598/
Package is APPROVED, and I've added you to the packager group. Please proceed with the new package process at the "Add Package to Source Code Management (SCM) system and Set Owner" step, and let me know if you get stuck or otherwise have questions. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/New_Package_Process_for_New_Contributors/#add_package_to_source_code_management_scm_system_and_set_owner Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated ===== MUST items ===== Generic: [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. Note: Using prebuilt packages [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. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.14/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.14 [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [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 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 4520 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]: 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: [x]: 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. [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. [-]: 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]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. [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. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rich-rst
FEDORA-2026-ce9a739ff9 (python-rich-rst-1.3.2-1.fc45) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 45. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-ce9a739ff9
FEDORA-2026-ce9a739ff9 (python-rich-rst-1.3.2-1.fc45) has been pushed to the Fedora 45 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2026-511ead2ce6 (python-rich-rst-1.3.2-1.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-511ead2ce6
FEDORA-2026-511ead2ce6 (python-rich-rst-1.3.2-1.fc44) has been pushed to the Fedora 44 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.