Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: python-tables - Hierarchical datasets in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Summary: Review Request: python-tables - Hierarchical datasets in Python Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: thibault.north@gmail.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: http://tnorth.fedorapeople.org/python-tables.spec SRPM URL: http://tnorth.fedorapeople.org/python-tables-2.3.1-1.fc15.src.rpm
Description: PyTables is a package for managing hierarchical datasets and designed to efficiently and easily cope with extremely large amounts of data.
A few licenses for each components of that package can be found in LICENSES/. IMHO, they are just AFL and BSD with various restrictions. But this might need a check.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #1 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-07 22:44:28 EST --- rpmlint -v output: python-tables.src: I: checking python-tables.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) datasets -> data sets, data-sets, databases python-tables.src: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datasets -> data sets, data-sets, databases python-tables.src: I: checking-url http://www.pytables.org (timeout 10 seconds) python-tables.src: I: checking-url http://sourceforge.net/projects/pytables/files/pytables/2.3.1/tables-2.3.1.t... (timeout 10 seconds) python-tables.x86_64: I: checking python-tables.x86_64: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) datasets -> data sets, data-sets, databases python-tables.x86_64: W: spelling-error %description -l en_US datasets -> data sets, data-sets, databases python-tables.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.pytables.org (timeout 10 seconds) python-tables.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ptrepack python-tables.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary nctoh5 python-tables.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary ptdump python-tables-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking python-tables-debuginfo.x86_64: I: checking-url http://www.pytables.org (timeout 10 seconds) 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 7 warnings.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |brendan.jones.it@gmail.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #2 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2011-11-10 15:27:27 EST --- I'll take this review
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #3 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2011-11-10 17:21:58 EST ---
Hi Thibault,
pretty much there, I've just got a couple of questions. The %check seems to take an awfully long time, and there are a number of test directories installed.
I'm just wondering if they're really necessary.
You could consider a separate doc package also for the examples and documentation, but that's just a suggestion. Full review below, I'll wait for your reply before passing.
[-] N/A [+] Good [!] Attention [?] Clarification
Required ========
[+] named according to the Package Naming Guidelines [+] The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec [+] Meet the Packaging Guidelines unless building for F12 and below or EPEL
[!] Be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines *** You just need to specify the lrucache.py is licensed under AFL
[+] The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license [+] License file must be included in %doc [+] The spec file must be written in American English [+] The spec file for the package MUST be legible *** I would split the Requires on separate lines for legibility but thats just personal preference
[+] The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source shasum c8592ce71809120cf3e8ee8e7befcfaa54085b3c OK [+] Successfully compile and build into binary rpms on at least one primary architecture [+] Proper use of ExcludeArch [!] All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires *** perhaps python2-devel rather than python-devel, although this is rather cosmetic
[+] The spec file MUST handle locales properly [-] Shared library files (not just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig in %post and %postun [+] Packages must NOT bundle copies of system libraries [+] If the package is designed to be relocatable, the packager must state this fact in the request for review, along with the rationalization for relocation of that specific package [+] A package must own all directories that it creates directories under this [+] A Fedora package must not list a file more than once in the spec file's %files listings [ ] Permissions on files must be set properly. %defattr(...) no longer required [+] Each package must consistently use macros [+] The package must contain code, or permissable content [+] Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage
[-] If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the runtime of the application [-] Header files must be in a -devel package [-] Static libraries must be in a -static package [-] library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel package [-] devel packages must require the base package using a fully versioned dependency [-] Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives [-] GUI apps must include a %{name}.desktop file, properly installed with desktop-file-install in the %install section [+] Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages [+] All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8
[!] Has BuildRequires: python2-devel and/or python3-devel https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#BuildRequires (As mentioned above)
[-] Defines and uses %{python_sitelib} or %{python_sitearch}: %if ! (0%{?fedora} > 12 || 0%{?rhel} > 5) %{!?python_sitelib: %global python_sitelib %(%{__python} -c "from distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib())")} %{!?python_sitearch: %global python_sitearch %(%{__python} -c "from distutils.sysconfig import get_python_lib; print(get_python_lib(1))")} %endif https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#Macros
[?] Has BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel
I'm really not sure if this is still required?
[+] Python eggs must be built from source. They cannot simply drop an egg from upstream into the proper directory. [+] Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [+] If egg-info files are generated by the modules build scripts they must be included in the package. [-] When building a compat package, it must install using easy_install -m so it won't conflict with the main package. [-] When building multiple versions (for a compat package) one of the packages must contain a default version that is usable via "import MODULE" with no prior setup. [+] A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [+] Requires OK
[+] Egg install: %install %{__python} setup.py install --skip-build --root $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
Should Items ============ [-] the packager SHOULD query upstream for any missing license text files to include it [-] Non-English language support for description and summary sections in the package spec if available [+] The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock [+] The package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures [+] The reviewer should test that the package functions as described tests OK [+] If scriptlets are used, those scriptlets must be sane [-] Usually, subpackages other than devel should require the base package using a fully versioned dependency [-] The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) should usually be placed in a -devel pkg [-] If the package has file dependencies outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, or /usr/sbin consider requiring the package which provides the file instead of the file itself [+] Should contain man pages for binaries/scripts None in source although adequate documentation
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #4 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-10 21:04:10 EST --- Hello Brendan, Thanks for your review.
The %check seems to take an awfully long time, and there are a number of test directories installed.
I'm just wondering if they're really necessary.
I don't really know. For python-numexpr, I was suggested to add these kind of checks. I guess it will help the tracking of some bugs if tests fail at a rebuild.
You could consider a separate doc package also for the examples and documentation, but that's just a suggestion. Full review below, I'll wait for your reply before passing.
Done.
[!] Be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines *** You just need to specify the lrucache.py is licensed under AFL
License is set to BSD and AFL: is that good enough?
[?] Has BuildRequires: python-setuptools-devel
I'm really not sure if this is still required?
I don't know. Other python- packages I have seen don't have it.
[!] All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires *** perhaps python2-devel rather than python-devel, although this is rather cosmetic
Fixed. Thanks again, Thibault
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #5 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-10 21:05:27 EST --- ...and new URLs of course:
Spec URL: http://tnorth.fedorapeople.org/python-tables.spec SRPM URL: http://tnorth.fedorapeople.org/python-tables-2.3.1-2.fc15.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #6 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2011-11-10 23:34:38 EST ---
Thanks Thibault, you just need to be a little more specific as to why its multi-licensed: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensi...
On closer inspection it looks like pytables bundles lrucache which looks to be a separate package in its own right, although it has been modified slightly by the pytables developers:
http://evan.prodromou.name/Software/Python/LRUCache
I will try and get some confirmation on this.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |brendan.jones.it@gmail.com
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2011-11-12 16:44:38 EST --- Hi Thibault,
I've run your package by the packing mail list and Toshio has some clear advice on how to proceed:
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/packaging/2011-November/007985.html
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #8 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-13 16:18:55 EST --- Hi Brendan,
Thanks for that. I will contact upstream and see what can be done about that.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #9 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-14 14:46:41 EST --- Hi Brendan,
According to upstream, Toshio's suggestion was good: remove lrucache.py and get rid of the AFL license. A patch was sent upstream.
Here is an updated build. In the %prep section, that file is removed along with its license. Is that good enough for this version of PyTables? Or do we need to remove lrucache.py from the tarball ?
Spec URL: http://tnorth.fedorapeople.org/python-tables.spec SRPM URL: http://tnorth.fedorapeople.org/python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc14.src.rpm
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #10 from Brendan Jones brendan.jones.it@gmail.com 2011-11-14 15:28:26 EST --- All good Thibault. This package is APPROVED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #11 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-14 16:34:44 EST --- Thank you Brendan.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #12 from Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com 2011-11-14 16:36:07 EST --- New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: python-tables Short Description: Hierarchical datasets in Python Owners: tnorth Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC:
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Thibault North thibault.north@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #13 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-11-15 08:00:58 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-15 10:06:25 EST --- python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc15 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 15. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc15
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-15 10:06:34 EST --- python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc16
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-15 19:26:31 EST --- python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 testing repository.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Fixed In Version| |python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc16 Resolution| |ERRATA Last Closed| |2011-11-25 18:27:18
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-25 18:27:18 EST --- python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fixed In Version|python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc16 |python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc15
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org 2011-11-25 18:30:29 EST --- python-tables-2.3.1-3.fc15 has been pushed to the Fedora 15 stable repository.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |orion@cora.nwra.com, | |zbyszek@in.waw.pl
--- Comment #19 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com --- Thibault/Zbigniew - either of you willing to maintain this in EPEL7?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #20 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl --- I don't think this should be any issue. I can't provide any special support for EPEL7, but I can build it along with the Fedora version and deal with any bugs which can be reproduced in Fedora.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #21 from Orion Poplawski orion@cora.nwra.com --- That would be great. I can help out too. Thanks.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review+ |fedora-review?
--- Comment #22 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl --- (In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #21)
That would be great. I can help out too. Thanks.
Great, thanks.
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: python-tables New Branches: epel7 Owners: tnorth zbyszek InitialCC:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? fedora-cvs+ |fedora-review+ fedora-cvs?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #23 from Jon Ciesla limburgher@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=751925
--- Comment #24 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek zbyszek@in.waw.pl --- https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/python-tables-3.2.0-1.el7,blosc-1.6....
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org