Fedora Account System
Red Hat Associate
Red Hat Customer
Spec URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-quickcheck/gap-pkg-quickcheck.spec SRPM URL: https://jjames.fedorapeople.org/gap-pkg-quickcheck/gap-pkg-quickcheck-1.0.2%5E20260731.3a1a010-1.fc46.src.rpm Fedora Account System Username: jjames Description: This package provides a library for randomized, property-based testing in GAP, inspired by the QuickCheck framework found in languages like Haskell. It allows you to write tests as general properties that should hold true for your code, and the QuickCheck package will then generate a large number of random test cases to try and find a counterexample. Features: - Property-Based Testing: Define properties and let the framework generate test data automatically. - Automatic Sizing: The package automatically tries a range of different sizes for the generated objects, starting with small and simple cases to find the minimal counterexamples first. - Variety of Types: It supports random generation for a range of common GAP types. I am willing to swap reviews.
Copr build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/build/10866474 (succeeded) Review template: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/@fedora-review/fedora-review-2516181-gap-pkg-quickcheck/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/10866474-gap-pkg-quickcheck/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.
I'll review it.
Actually the package seems to be in a very good shape. I cant see anything critical so here is my formal 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 (MPL-2.0). [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries or specifies bundled libraries with Provides: bundled(<libname>) if unbundling is not possible. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format (%autochangelg). [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package does not contain desktop file (not a GUI application). [-]: No need for a separate -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. [-]: The package is not a rename of another package. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package does not contain systemd file. [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 must own all directories that it creates. [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 1487 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== 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). [?]: I did not test if the package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged (a recent git snapshot). [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Sources weren't verified with gpgverify. [?]: I did not test if the package compiles and builds 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: gap-pkg-quickcheck-1.0.2^20260731.3a1a010-1.fc46.noarch.rpm gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc-1.0.2^20260731.3a1a010-1.fc46.noarch.rpm gap-pkg-quickcheck-1.0.2^20260731.3a1a010-1.fc46.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/tmp0dnj33gp')] checks: 32, packages: 3 gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation ^^^ That's unfortunate false positive. gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/chooser.html ../../GAPDoc/styles/chooser.html gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/lefttoc.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/lefttoc.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/manual.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/manual.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/manual.js ../../GAPDoc/styles/manual.js gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/nocolorprompt.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/nocolorprompt.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/ragged.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/ragged.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/rainbow.js ../../GAPDoc/styles/rainbow.js gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/times.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/times.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/toggless.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/toggless.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/toggless.js ../../GAPDoc/styles/toggless.js 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings, 12 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.10.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.15/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: 33, packages: 2 gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/chooser.html ../../GAPDoc/styles/chooser.html gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/lefttoc.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/lefttoc.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/manual.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/manual.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/manual.js ../../GAPDoc/styles/manual.js gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/nocolorprompt.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/nocolorprompt.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/ragged.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/ragged.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/rainbow.js ../../GAPDoc/styles/rainbow.js gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/times.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/times.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/toggless.css ../../GAPDoc/styles/toggless.css gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc.noarch: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/share/gap/pkg/quickcheck/doc/toggless.js ../../GAPDoc/styles/toggless.js 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 11 warnings, 8 filtered, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/gap-packages/quickcheck/archive/3a1a01078ab9ec053332cd78005aaa2ac634a0ac/quickcheck-3a1a010.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 03d318a97ec3bf20564625d711b0ef92246438388ceff87b90a9096cb4670043 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 03d318a97ec3bf20564625d711b0ef92246438388ceff87b90a9096cb4670043 Requires -------- gap-pkg-quickcheck (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gap(polycyclic) gap-core gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gap-online-help gap-pkg-quickcheck Provides -------- gap-pkg-quickcheck: gap(QuickCheck) gap(quickcheck) gap-pkg-quickcheck gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc: gap-pkg-quickcheck-doc Generated by fedora-review 0.11.0 (05c5b26) last change: 2025-11-29 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2516181 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: fonts, R, PHP, Java, Ocaml, SugarActivity, Perl, Haskell, Python, C/C++ Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH This package is ================ === APPROVED === ================
> This package is > > ================ > === APPROVED === > ================ I am impressed by the deep analysis on this review. I am new to this so better to ask: do you use a lint tool or something similar for the review?
(In reply to Leo Sandoval from comment #4) > > This package is > > > > ================ > > === APPROVED === > > ================ > > I am impressed by the deep analysis on this review. > > I am new to this so better to ask: do you use a lint tool or something > similar for the review? We have a nice helper - fedora-review. It spots most of the issues, and generates a checklist of things to review. Very handy one!
Thank you for the review, Peter! Indeed, fedora-review is great. Just `sudo dnf install fedora-review`, and then you can run the fedora-review tool and pass it a bugzilla bug number (-b 2516181, for example), or a COPR URL.
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/gap-pkg-quickcheck Monitoring: Wasn't able to create project in Anitya. You can create it manually on: `https://release-monitoring.org`
FEDORA-2026-8e967e34a3 (gap-pkg-quickcheck-1.0.2^20260731.3a1a010-1.fc45) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 45. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-8e967e34a3
FEDORA-2026-8f6154810f (gap-pkg-quickcheck-1.0.2^20260731.3a1a010-1.fc44) has been submitted as an update to Fedora 44. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-8f6154810f
FEDORA-2026-8e967e34a3 has been pushed to the Fedora 45 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-8e967e34a3 \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-8e967e34a3 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2026-8f6154810f has been pushed to the Fedora 44 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2026-8f6154810f \*` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2026-8f6154810f See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.