https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
Bug ID: 2241171 Summary: Review Request: python-pyxdameraulevenshtein - Damerau-Levenshtein (DL) edit distance algorithm Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Hardware: All OS: Linux Status: NEW Component: Package Review Severity: medium Assignee: nobody@fedoraproject.org Reporter: code@musicinmybrain.net QA Contact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Blocks: 1276941 (fedora-neuro) Target Milestone: --- Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.spec SRPM URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-1.7.1-1.fc40.src...
Description:
pyxDamerauLevenshtein implements the Damerau-Levenshtein (DL) edit distance algorithm for Python in Cython for high performance.
Fedora Account System Username: music
Koji scratch builds:
F40: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106793170 F39: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106793441 F38: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106793607 F37: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=106793824
Of the three missing optional dependencies that would enable additional functionality in python-textdistance, this is the one that is actively maintained. Once python-textdistance upstream follows through with removing the abydos dependency (https://github.com/life4/textdistance/pull/90), having this packaged will allow us to add metapackages for several textdistance extras.
This will be a neuro-sig package.
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1276941 [Bug 1276941] Fedora NeuroImaging and NeuroScience tracking bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |benson_muite@emailplus.org Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |benson_muite@emailplus.org Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Flags| |fedora-review?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |POST Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #1 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org --- Package Review ==============
Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed
===== MUST items =====
C/C++: [x]: Development (unversioned) .so files in -devel subpackage, if present. Note: Unversioned so-files in private %_libdir subdirectory (see attachment). Verify they are not in ld path.
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", "BSD 3-Clause License", "*No copyright* BSD 3-Clause License". 7 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein/2241171- python-pyxdameraulevenshtein/licensecheck.txt [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [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]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [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 19200 bytes in 2 files. [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]: 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. [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: [-]: 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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein [ ]: 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]: 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). [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched.
Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein-1.7.1-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-debugsource-1.7.1-1.fc38.x86_64.rpm python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-1.7.1-1.fc38.src.rpm =================================== rpmlint session starts ================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.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/tmpa1ead3zc')] checks: 31, packages: 3
python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein/CHANGES.md python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.src: W: strange-permission python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.spec 600 ==== 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 5.7 s ===
Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.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: 31, packages: 2
python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein.x86_64: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein/CHANGES.md 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 1.0 s
Unversioned so-files -------------------- python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein: /usr/lib64/python3.11/site-packages/pyxdameraulevenshtein.cpython-311-x86_64-linux-gnu.so
Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/lanl/pyxDamerauLevenshtein/archive/v1.7.1/pyxDamerauLeven... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : e2bd561d97dc5441772379826d665fa8b2bffc2e0180da03b2b29b48f38b97d5 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : e2bd561d97dc5441772379826d665fa8b2bffc2e0180da03b2b29b48f38b97d5
Requires -------- python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): libc.so.6()(64bit) python(abi) rtld(GNU_HASH)
python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-debugsource (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
Provides -------- python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein: python-pyxdameraulevenshtein python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein python3-pyxdameraulevenshtein(x86-64) python3.11-pyxdameraulevenshtein python3.11dist(pyxdameraulevenshtein) python3dist(pyxdameraulevenshtein)
python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-debugsource: python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-debugsource python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-debugsource(x86-64)
Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein/2241171-python-pyxdameraulevenshtein/srpm/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.spec 2023-09-28 20:46:02.695568432 +0300 +++ /home/FedoraPackaging/reviews/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein/2241171-python-pyxdameraulevenshtein/srpm-unpacked/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.spec 2023-09-27 03:00:00.000000000 +0300 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.3.5) +## 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 + Name: python-pyxdameraulevenshtein Version: 1.7.1 @@ -68,3 +78,4 @@
%changelog -%autochangelog +* Wed Sep 27 2023 John Doe packager@example.com - 1.7.1-1 +- Uncommitted changes
Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2241171 -m fedora-38-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-38-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: C/C++, R, Ruby, fonts, PHP, Haskell, Ocaml, Java, Perl, SugarActivity Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH
Comments: a) Perhaps change permissions of spec file and line end encoding of CHANGES.md upon import. b) Approved c) May wish to also examine https://pypi.org/project/editdistance/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #2 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- Thank you for the review!
(In reply to Benson Muite from comment #1)
Comments: a) Perhaps change permissions of spec file and line end encoding of CHANGES.md upon import.
The warning
python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.src: W: strange-permission python-pyxdameraulevenshtein.spec 600
is an rpmautospec bug that appears on every package that uses it. It looks like it was fixed, but the fix was not yet released. See https://pagure.io/fedora-infra/rpmautospec/issue/301 for details. Fortunately, the “strange” permissions are harmless.
The “DOS-style” CRLF line terminators in CHANGES.md are indeed something I missed, and I will fix them on import.
b) Approved c) May wish to also examine https://pypi.org/project/editdistance/
There are a lot of implementations of this family of algorithms. The goal of packaging this one is to provide all of the optional dependencies of https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-textdistance, which in turn is a dependency for the Spyder IDE. We don’t strictly need the corresponding textdistance “extras” for Spyder, but it’s nice to have a complete package.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #3 from Fedora Admin user for bugzilla script actions fedora-admin-xmlrpc@fedoraproject.org --- The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-pyxdameraulevenshtein
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #4 from Ben Beasley code@musicinmybrain.net --- Added to release monitoring: https://release-monitoring.org/project/98256/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|POST |MODIFIED
--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-285a34969f has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-285a34969f
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed| |2023-10-01 14:31:43
--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-285a34969f has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #7 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-c5860ebb98 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c5860ebb98
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-35277dfd23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-35277dfd23
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-c5860ebb98 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-c5860ebb98` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-c5860ebb98
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=2241171
--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-35277dfd23 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-35277dfd23` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-35277dfd23
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=2241171
--- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5eab24e5f1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5eab24e5f1
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-1a861aaba5 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-1a861aaba5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #13 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-1a861aaba5 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-1a861aaba5` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-1a861aaba5
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=2241171
--- Comment #14 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5eab24e5f1 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5eab24e5f1
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=2241171
--- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-35277dfd23 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #16 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2023-5eab24e5f1 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-1a861aaba5 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #18 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-2023-c5860ebb98 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-6731f78807 (python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-1.8.0-3.el10_0) has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 10.0. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-6731f78807
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2241171
--- Comment #20 from Fedora Update System updates@fedoraproject.org --- FEDORA-EPEL-2024-6731f78807 (python-pyxdameraulevenshtein-1.8.0-3.el10_0) has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 10.0 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org