Spec URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-vcs-versioning.spec SRPM URL: https://churchyard.fedorapeople.org/SRPMS/python-vcs-versioning-1.1.1-1.fc43.src.rpm Description: This package extracts project version information from version control system (VCS) metadata, eliminating the need to manually maintain version numbers in multiple places. It automatically derives versions from VCS tags and commit history. Fedora Account System Username: churchyard
See https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/churchyard/vcs-versioning/builds/ Including https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/churchyard/vcs-versioning/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10280547-python-vcs-versioning/fedora-review/review.txt
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10280948 (failed) Build log: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2453608-python-vcs-versioning/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10280948-python-vcs-versioning/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.
Created attachment 2135758 [details] Updated spec file 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", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License". 71 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-vcs- versioning/2453608-python-vcs-versioning/srpm-unpacked/review- python-vcs-versioning/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 [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. [!]: 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. [ ]: 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 520 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. [ ]: 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). [ ]: 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: [!]: 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-vcs-versioning-1.1.1-1.fc45.noarch.rpm python-vcs-versioning-1.1.1-1.fc45.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/tmpy7h2_ftt')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python3-vcs-versioning.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vcs-versioning 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 7 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.9.0 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-vcs-versioning.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary vcs-versioning 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 3 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.7 s Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/v/vcs_versioning/vcs_versioning-1.1.1.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : fabd75a3cab7dd8ac02fe24a3a9ba936bf258667b5a62ed468c9a1da0f5775bc CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : fabd75a3cab7dd8ac02fe24a3a9ba936bf258667b5a62ed468c9a1da0f5775bc Requires -------- python3-vcs-versioning (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3.14dist(packaging) Provides -------- python3-vcs-versioning: python-vcs-versioning python3-vcs-versioning python3.14-vcs-versioning python3.14dist(vcs-versioning) python3dist(vcs-versioning) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-vcs-versioning/2453608-python-vcs-versioning/srpm-unpacked/python-vcs-versioning.spec 2026-04-02 12:21:39.724687756 +0300 +++ /home/fedora-packaging/reviews/python-vcs-versioning/2453608-python-vcs-versioning/srpm-unpacked/review-python-vcs-versioning/srpm-unpacked/python-vcs-versioning.spec 2026-04-02 03:00:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.8.4) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 1; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + # Bootstrap mode is needed to break circular dependency with setuptools-scm: # - vcs-versioning tests require setuptools_scm @@ -65,3 +75,6 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Thu Apr 02 2026 John Doe <packager> - 1.1.1-1 +- Uncommitted changes +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n python-vcs-versioning Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Python Disabled plugins: C/C++, fonts, Java, SugarActivity, Perl, Ocaml, Haskell, PHP, R Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) python3-pytest is needed to check imports. Please add it. b) Check how enabling tests is done. At present it does not allow the build to complete correctly. c) Approved. Please see example spec file for one way to fix (a) and (b) before import, though feel free to choose another method. d) Review of: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2454239 would be appreciated if time allows.
> a) python3-pytest is needed to check imports. Please add it. Oh, I see. I accidentally had `BuildOption(generate_buildrequires): -g test` unconditionally for the first bootstrap build. We cannot add pytest BR, as pytest BRs setuptools-scm and that creates the bootstrap loop. I'll exclude the modules instead. > b) Check how enabling tests is done. At present it does not allow the build to complete correctly. What do you mean by that? > c) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2454239 Ack.
a) fixed
Benson, could you please set the fedora review + flag?
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-vcs-versioning
Thanks.
FEDORA-2026-003bba02f2 (python-setuptools_scm-10.0.5-1.fc45 and python-vcs-versioning-1.1.1-1.fc45) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 45. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-003bba02f2
FEDORA-2026-003bba02f2 (python-setuptools_scm-10.0.5-1.fc45 and python-vcs-versioning-1.1.1-1.fc45) has been pushed to the Fedora 45 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.