https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Bug ID: 2035004 Summary: Review Request: python-ibm-vpc - Python client library for IBM Cloud VPC Services Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Priority: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: praiskup@redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python-ap... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python... Description: Python client library to interact with various IBM Cloud Virtual Private Cloud (VPC) Service APIs. Fedora Account System Username: praiskup
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Maxwell G gotmax@e.email changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |gotmax@e.email
--- Comment #1 from Maxwell G gotmax@e.email ---
%pyproject_save_files 'ibm_vpc' +auto
The `+auto` option should not be used, according to the Python Packaging Guidelines.
%check %pyproject_check_import
Upstream provides tests. You should run them in place of `%pyproject_check_import` if possible/practical.
Also, it would be helpful if you could enable the option to run fedora-review in Copr so the reviewer doesn't have to do so themself.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
--- Comment #2 from Pavel Raiskup praiskup@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python-ap... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python... Diff: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python-ap... Review.txt: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python...
Thanks for taking a look!
The `+auto` option should not be used
Wasn't needed, so dropped now.
Upstream provides tests.
I don't see them in the upstream provided PyPI tarball, so it would be quite some work to keep them updated manually from the upstream git.
Also, it would be helpful if you could enable the option to run fedora-review in Copr so the reviewer doesn't have to do so themself.
Done.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jkadlcik@redhat.com
--- Comment #3 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com ---
# Check if the automatically generated License and its spelling is correct for Fedora # https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuideline...
I probably don't understand this comment. It reads more like a TODO to me
Otherwise, it looks good to me.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
--- Comment #4 from Pavel Raiskup praiskup@redhat.com --- Spec URL: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python-ap... SRPM URL: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python... Diff: https://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python-ap... Review.txt: https://download.copr.fedorainfracloud.org/results/praiskup/ibm-cloud-python...
Thank you for the review! Updated.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jkadlcik@redhat.com Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Kadlčík jkadlcik@redhat.com --- Thank you for the change. Please be aware that the package fails to build for Fedora 34. I don't see it as a blocker though.
Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== 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. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "Unknown or generated", "Apache License 2.0". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/python-ibm- vpc/licensecheck.txt [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. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: No rpmlint messages. [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]: 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]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local
Python: [x]: 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: [!]: 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. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: 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]: 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).
Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-ibm-vpc-0.9.0-3.fc36.noarch.rpm python-ibm-vpc-0.9.0-3.fc36.src.rpm 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- Cannot parse rpmlint output:
Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/i/ibm-vpc/ibm-vpc-0.9.0.tar.g... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : bd7a06e14be73685c736c01fc904d289642b68b01a84a85950d5ad341256436b CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : bd7a06e14be73685c736c01fc904d289642b68b01a84a85950d5ad341256436b
Requires -------- python3-ibm-vpc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (python3.10dist(python-dateutil) < 3~~ with python3.10dist(python-dateutil)
= 2.5.3)
python(abi) python3.10dist(ibm-cloud-sdk-core)
Provides -------- python3-ibm-vpc: python-ibm-vpc python3-ibm-vpc python3.10-ibm-vpc python3.10dist(ibm-vpc) python3dist(ibm-vpc)
Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review --no-colors --prebuilt --rpm-spec --name python-ibm-vpc --mock-config /var/lib/copr-rpmbuild/results/configs/child.cfg Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Python Disabled plugins: fonts, R, Ocaml, Perl, Java, SugarActivity, C/C++, Haskell, PHP Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
--- Comment #6 from Pavel Raiskup praiskup@redhat.com --- https://pagure.io/releng/fedora-scm-requests/issue/40450
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
--- Comment #7 from Pavel Raiskup praiskup@redhat.com --- Hmpf, some problems appeared: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/10512
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Maxwell G gotmax@e.email changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |POST
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-7a11172e9e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 35. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-7a11172e9e
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-7a11172e9e has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2022-7a11172e9e *` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-7a11172e9e
See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mhroncok@redhat.com
--- Comment #10 from Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com ---
Upstream provides tests.
I don't see them in the upstream provided PyPI tarball, so it would be quite some work to keep them updated manually from the upstream git.
They tag their releases on GitHub, so consider using the github tarball as a source, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_source_fi...
I have a patch for that, but the test collection takes ages, not sure if it isn't broken: https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/churchyard/rpms/python-ibm-vpc/diff/rawhi...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
--- Comment #11 from Miro Hrončok mhroncok@redhat.com --- (In reply to Miro Hrončok from comment #10)
Upstream provides tests.
I don't see them in the upstream provided PyPI tarball, so it would be quite some work to keep them updated manually from the upstream git.
They tag their releases on GitHub, so consider using the github tarball as a source, see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/ #_source_files_from_pypi
I have a patch for that, but the test collection takes ages, not sure if it isn't broken: https://src.fedoraproject.org/fork/churchyard/rpms/python-ibm-vpc/diff/ rawhide..pytest
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-ibm-vpc/pull-request/1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
--- Comment #12 from Pavel Raiskup praiskup@redhat.com --- Awesome, thank you!
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2035004
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |ERRATA Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Last Closed| |2022-01-13 01:05:45
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2022-7a11172e9e has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org