https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1451066 nicolas.vieville@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |nicolas.vieville@univ-valen | |ciennes.fr --- Comment #1 from nicolas.vieville@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Hello, As a new coming packager, I'll do an informal review of your package review request. Please feel free to make any comment about this. Summary of review potential problems. MUST - License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. 40 files have unknown license. Global BSD licence is OK, so I think that 40 files are OK (not necessary to add licence field in each one)? SHOULD - Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. Maybe it should be necessary to explain the goal of this patch in a comment in the spec file. It should also be necessary to name it with an explicit name and probably beginning with the package name (python-cli-helpers-001_don_t_install_tests.tabular_output.patch for example). Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed Issues: ======= - Package installs properly. Note: Installation errors (dependencies not found: python-terminaltables) - not blocking as request review for it is present #1451054 ===== 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. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD (3 clause)", "Unknown or generated". 40 files have unknown license. [-]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.6/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.6 [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 20480 bytes in 6 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]: 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 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]: 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 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. [x]: 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 python2 -cli-helpers , python3-cli-helpers [-]: 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. [x]: 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. [ ]: 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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Installation errors ------------------- INFO: mock.py version 1.3.4 starting (python version = 3.5.3)... Start: init plugins INFO: selinux enabled Finish: init plugins Start: run Start: chroot init INFO: calling preinit hooks INFO: enabled root cache INFO: enabled dnf cache Start: cleaning dnf metadata Finish: cleaning dnf metadata INFO: enabled HW Info plugin Mock Version: 1.3.4 INFO: Mock Version: 1.3.4 Finish: chroot init INFO: installing package(s): /home/nico/Systeme/Fedora/Reviews/1451066-python-cli-helpers/results/python3-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/nico/Systeme/Fedora/Reviews/1451066-python-cli-helpers/results/python2-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm ERROR: Command failed. See logs for output. # /usr/bin/dnf --installroot /var/lib/mock/fedora-rawhide-x86_64/root/ --releasever 27 --disableplugin=local --setopt=deltarpm=false install /home/nico/Systeme/Fedora/Reviews/1451066-python-cli-helpers/results/python3-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm /home/nico/Systeme/Fedora/Reviews/1451066-python-cli-helpers/results/python2-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm --setopt=tsflags=nocontexts Rpmlint ------- Checking: python2-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm python3-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.noarch.rpm python-cli-helpers-0.1.0-2.fc27.src.rpm 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Requires -------- python2-cli-helpers (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python2-terminaltables python3-cli-helpers (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3-terminaltables Provides -------- python2-cli-helpers: python-cli-helpers python2-cli-helpers python2.7dist(cli-helpers) python2dist(cli-helpers) python3-cli-helpers: python3-cli-helpers python3.6dist(cli-helpers) python3dist(cli-helpers) Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/dbcli/cli_helpers/archive/v0.1.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 0e94780ec62da9a389e6e04e9331ea32ab827f31c3e47c69401fc9af545f9c67 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 0e94780ec62da9a389e6e04e9331ea32ab827f31c3e47c69401fc9af545f9c67 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 1451066 -m fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Java, C/C++, fonts, SugarActivity, Ocaml, Perl, Haskell, R, PHP Disabled flags: EXARCH, DISTTAG, EPEL5, BATCH, EPEL6 I'll make an informal review of the python-terminaltables later in the evening. Cordially, -- NVieville -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
