https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1036755 --- Comment #5 from Dridi Boukelmoune <dridi.boukelmoune@xxxxxxxxx> --- First review: - http://falcao.it/HTTPretty/ seems more appropriate for the URL tag - upstream latest version is 0.7.1 and contains the tests/ directory - have you filed an issue related to your patch upstream ? - have you checked whether autoreq finds the dependencies ? - readability: maybe add a blank line before each "%if 0%{?with_python3}" - have you opened an issue upstream to make the test suite deterministic ? sounds like a temporary fix to run the tests until they all succeed - you should maybe ask upstream to put the COPYING file in the source tarball - you can replace "/usr/bin/nosetests-3*" with "nosetests-%{python3_version}" or /usr/bin should at least be replaced by %{_bindir} f-r shows other packaging issues below. 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. [?]: 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 %doc. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 1 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/dridi/fedora/_reviews/1036755-python-httpretty/licensecheck.txt [-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. Note: Macros in: python-httpretty (description), python3-httpretty (description) [-]: 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. [!]: 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. [?]: 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 20480 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]: 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]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [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]: 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. [!]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-httpretty [?]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [!]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [!]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments [-]: 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]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag [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]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL). [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [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: python-httpretty-0.6.5-1.fc21.noarch.rpm python3-httpretty-0.6.5-1.fc21.noarch.rpm python-httpretty-0.6.5-1.fc21.src.rpm python-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2 python-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-urllib3 python-httpretty.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.7.0-1 ['0.6.5-1.fc21', '0.6.5-1'] python3-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-httplib2 python3-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-urllib3 python-httpretty.src: W: invalid-url Source1: httpretty-0.6.5-tests.zip 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 2 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint python-httpretty python3-httpretty python-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-httplib2 python-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python-urllib3 python-httpretty.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.7.0-1 ['0.6.5-1.fc21', '0.6.5-1'] python3-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-httplib2 python3-httpretty.noarch: E: explicit-lib-dependency python3-urllib3 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/dridi/fedora/_reviews/1036755-python-httpretty/srpm/python-httpretty.spec 2013-12-21 16:40:48.938660034 +0100 +++ /home/dridi/fedora/_reviews/1036755-python-httpretty/srpm-unpacked/python-httpretty.spec 2013-12-02 15:38:11.000000000 +0100 @@ -15,5 +15,5 @@ Source1: %{pypi_name}-%{version}-tests.zip -# Only check equality of numbers, not objects +# Only check equality of number, not objects Patch0: %{pypi_name}-test418.patch @@ -99,6 +99,5 @@ %check -# the tests sometimes fail and sometimes don't -# let them run until they're OK :D +# the tests are going to fail in koji, so let them until nosetests --verbosity 2; do :; done %if 0%{?with_python3} Requires -------- python-httpretty (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python-coverage python-httplib2 python-mock python-requests python-tornado python-urllib3 python3-httpretty (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-coverage python3-httplib2 python3-mock python3-requests python3-tornado python3-urllib3 Provides -------- python-httpretty: python-httpretty python3-httpretty: python3-httpretty Source checksums ---------------- http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/h/httpretty/httpretty-0.6.5.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 5914118c511c05b1d02c52c0330b4a1c4a826ec7dca6f2bf42294c40799d7e31 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 5914118c511c05b1d02c52c0330b4a1c4a826ec7dca6f2bf42294c40799d7e31 Generated by fedora-review 0.5.0 (920221d) last change: 2013-08-30 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1036755 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, SugarActivity, Perl, R, PHP, Ruby Disabled flags: EPEL5, EXARCH, DISTTAG -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review