https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1286699 --- Comment #10 from Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to William Moreno from comment #9) > Jeremy: > > 1- From python packages allways check if upstream support python3, python3 > builds must be prefered over python2 builds as part of the move of Fedora to > python3 by default. > In this particular case, it is intended only for EPEL 7, where python-django does not support Python 3. I do not intend to maintain this in Fedora. Therefore there is no reason to package a python 3 version of this project. (Upstream supports Python 3 only when used with a version of Django that also supports it) > 2- For Fedora and epel7 there is no need of clean before and after %%install > True, that was a leftover from the old spec I copied from. > 3- For Fedora and epel7 there is no need of %%defattr in %%files > Same as 2. > 4- For Fedora and epel7 provides a python2 package now it is mandatory also > you must use the python-provides macro. > Huh, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Python#The_.25python_provide_macro is really confusing. How exactly is this macro supposed to be used? > 5- Epel7 now support python but there is a lot of packages than do not build > with python3 in epel7 I should recomend request to the package maintainer to > build with python3 in epel7 and include a link to the bug in the spec to > track whem the package can build with both python2 and python3 in epel7 > See above; python 3 support is not useful. > Package Review > ============== > 1. For epel7 there not need of %clean also you can drop the rm -rf > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT in %%install > [Fail]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > > 2. For epel7 there is not need of %%defattr in %%files > [Fail]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 > > 3. There is not a update in the changelog for the 2 release, you can update > this changes without need to bump other release. > [Fail]: Changelog in prescribed format. > > 4. In epel7 there is support for python3 and upstream support python2 and > python3 bug there is not support for python3 in the epel7 build of > python-django. Any way current Python Packaging Guidelines for Fedora and > epel7 requires to provide a python2-subpackage and use the python-provides > macro. > [Fail]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=702298 > > 5. Looks like upstream provides some test than you sloud try to run in the > build process > [Fail]: %check is present and all tests pass. > https://github.com/goinnn/django-multiselectfield/blob/master/example/ > run_tests.py > These tests are not included in the release tarball, so I cannot run them. > ===== MUST items ===== > Generic: > [Pass]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets > other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging > Guidelines. > [Pass]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > [Pass]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. > [Pass]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. > [NA]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. > [NA]: Development files must be in a -devel package > [Pass]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. > [Pass]: Package consistently uses macros. > [Pass]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. > [Pass]: Package does not generate any conflict. > [Pass]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. > [Pass]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. > [Pass]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. > [NA]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. > [NA]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. > [NA]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. > [NA]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines > [Pass]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least > one supported primary architecture. > [Pass]: Package installs properly. > [Pass]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. > [Pass]: 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. > [Pass]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. > [Pass]: Package must own all directories that it creates. > [Pass]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. > [Pass]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any > that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. > [Pass]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT > [Pass]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the > beginning of %install. > [Pass]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. > [Pass]: Dist tag is present. > [Pass]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. > [Pass]: Permissions on files are set properly. > [Pass]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't > work. > [Pass]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. > [Pass]: Package does not use a name that already exists. > [Pass]: Package is not relocatable. > [Pass]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as > provided in the spec URL. > [Pass]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format > %{name}.spec. > [Pass]: File names are valid UTF-8. > [Pass]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local > > Python: > [Pass]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build > process. > [Pass]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface > should > provide egg info. > [Pass]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel > [Pass]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep > > ===== SHOULD items ===== > Generic: > [NA]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. > [Pass]: Final provides and requires are sane (see attachments). > [NA]: Package functions as described. > [Pass]: Latest version is packaged. > [Pass]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. > [NA]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains > translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. > [NA]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported > architectures. > [Pass]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed > files. > [Pass]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file > [Pass]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag > [Pass]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. > [Pass]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. > [Pass]: SourceX is a working URL. > [Pass]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified. > > ===== EXTRA items ===== > > Generic: > [Pass]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. > [Pass]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. > > Rpmlint > ------- > Checking: python-django-multiselectfield-0.1.3-2.fc21.noarch.rpm > python-django-multiselectfield-0.1.3-2.fc21.src.rpm > python-django-multiselectfield.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) > multi -> mulch, mufti > python-django-multiselectfield.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog > 0.1.3-1 ['0.1.3-2.fc21', '0.1.3-2'] > python-django-multiselectfield.src: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) multi > -> mulch, mufti > 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings. > > Rpmlint (installed packages) > ---------------------------- > python-django-multiselectfield.noarch: W: spelling-error Summary(en_US) > multi -> mulch, mufti > python-django-multiselectfield.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog > 0.1.3-1 ['0.1.3-2.fc21', '0.1.3-2'] > 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. > > Requires > -------- > python-django-multiselectfield (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): > python(abi) > python-django > > Provides > -------- > python-django-multiselectfield: > python-django-multiselectfield > > Source checksums > ---------------- > https://pypi.python.org/packages/source/d/django-multiselectfield/django- > multiselectfield-0.1.3.tar.gz : > CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : > 3b7e950323d477e40660d737bf79777d9122c3962a55af5bd60819e40472fc6c > CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : > 3b7e950323d477e40660d737bf79777d9122c3962a55af5bd60819e40472fc6c Spec URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-django-multiselectfield/python-django-multiselectfield.spec SRPM URL: https://sgallagh.fedorapeople.org/packagereview/python-django-multiselectfield/python-django-multiselectfield-0.1.3-3.fc23.src.rpm EPEL 7 scratch-build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12040471 -- 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