https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1914689 code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(hobbes1069@gmail. | |com) --- Comment #10 from code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - It is a lot easier to review if you update both the spec and SRPM. This will be mandatory for approval, since the SRPM is needed to create the initial dist-git repo. (Even better, bump the release when you make changes.) - The LICENSE.md file for the bundled semantic-ui must be installed with %license too. - There is a bundled copy of semantic-ui included. You must follow https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#bundling. Since upstream does not *technically* support building with an external copy, you have the option to publicly contact upstream about a path to doing so, and then add the appropriate virtual Provides: Provides: bundled(js-semantic-ui) = 2.4.1 However, all it would take to use a separately-packaged copy would be to replace this directory with a symbolic link. Then you could package js-semantic-ui as a dependency in accordance with https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/JavaScript/ and https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Web_Assets/. This has advantages: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries#Why_Bundled_Libraries_are_a_problem. Note that if you do package or bundle js-semantic-ui, you must compile/minify the CSS and JS yourself from the original sources in the RPM build process, and you must include the original sources in the RPM, not just the minified ones. …but note the next issue, below! - A new major version, 2.0.0, was released in late January; you should package it instead. This affects the semantic-ui situation: “JS/CSS assets are now copied across by sphinx when builing, rather than being copied by the extension”. From testing building sphinx-tabs’s own documentation, I don’t see any reliance on semantic-ui at all. Maybe the problem has gone away. You should look into it more closely than I did. - You correctly noted in %check that Sphinx is too old for this package on EPEL (both 7 and 8). Besides, the pyproject-rpm-macros are not available on EPEL. So, remove the EPEL-specific cruft from the spec file. Each “%{python3_pkgversion}” should just become a “3”. This %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{pypi_name}} should be deleted; even if you were packaging for EPEL, you should conditionalize it because this macro should not be used on Fedora; see https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_the_py_provides_macro. If you are packaging for Fedora 32, add: %if 0{?fedora} == 32 %py_provides python3-%{pypi_name} %endif where the conditional is not mandatory, but helps remind you to remove the macro once F32 is EOL. I recommend not bothering this late in its lifecycle, though. This was never needed even for EPEL, as both EPEL and Fedora define the macro: %{?!python3_pkgversion:%global python3_pkgversion 3} BR’s should be written like: BuildRequires: python3-devel BuildRequires: python3dist(setuptools) - “%pyproject_save_files sphinx_tabs” could become “%pyproject_save_files %{python_module_name}”, if you like - Instead of manually specifying BR’s for testing, change %pyproject_buildrequires to %pyproject_buildrequires -x testing You can fix the missing python3dist(bs4) by replacing "bs4" with "beautifulsoup4" in setup.py; see https://pypi.org/project/bs4/. You can loosen the pytest version restriction, which is currently <4; version 6 does work. Unfortunately, you still cannot run the tests without python3dist(pytest-regressions), so choose one of the following: - Package python-pytest-regressions. - Figure out how to patch it out of the tests, and run them. - Go back to just “%pyproject_buildrequires”, and put a comment where the %check section would be explaining the missing dependency. If you do get the tests working, %check %pytest should work just fine. - It would be nice if you build the HTML documentation and installed it in a -doc subpackage. Just set PYTHONPATH and use sphinx-build. ===== 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: "Unknown or generated", "Expat License", "*No copyright* Expat License". 52 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/reviewer/review-python-sphinx- tabs/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.9/site- packages/sphinx_tabs/__pycache__ [!]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.9/site- packages/sphinx_tabs/__pycache__ [!]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. Bundled js-semantic-ui must be handled per guidelines. See Issues. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [!]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. Precompiled/pre-minified JS/CSS may not be used. [-]: 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. [x]: 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 (except as noted) [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 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: [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 (except as noted) [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). [x]: Package functions as described. [!]: 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. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %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: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: No rpmlint messages. [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-sphinx-tabs-1.3.0-1.fc34.noarch.rpm python-sphinx-tabs-1.3.0-1.fc34.src.rpm python-sphinx-tabs.src:24: W: macro-in-comment %{python3_pkgversion} python-sphinx-tabs.src:25: W: macro-in-comment %{python3_pkgversion} python-sphinx-tabs.src:27: W: macro-in-comment %{python3_pkgversion} python-sphinx-tabs.src: E: specfile-error warning: Macro expanded in comment on line 24: %{python3_pkgversion}-beautifulsoup4 python-sphinx-tabs.src: E: specfile-error python-sphinx-tabs.src: E: specfile-error warning: Macro expanded in comment on line 25: %{python3_pkgversion}-pygments python-sphinx-tabs.src: E: specfile-error python-sphinx-tabs.src: E: specfile-error warning: Macro expanded in comment on line 27: %{python3_pkgversion}-sphinx 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 5 errors, 3 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/executablebooks/sphinx-tabs/archive/v1.3.0/sphinx-tabs-1.3.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : c6fc75c282bd56fe1cf58a5d97ce6f6ceb252e56e34f6e1c7eff28ee0ff94036 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : c6fc75c282bd56fe1cf58a5d97ce6f6ceb252e56e34f6e1c7eff28ee0ff94036 Requires -------- python3-sphinx-tabs (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): (python3.9dist(sphinx) < 4 with python3.9dist(sphinx) >= 2) python(abi) python3.9dist(pygments) Provides -------- python3-sphinx-tabs: python-sphinx-tabs python3-sphinx-tabs python3.9-sphinx-tabs python3.9dist(sphinx-tabs) python3dist(sphinx-tabs) Generated by fedora-review 0.7.6 (b083f91) last change: 2020-11-10 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -n python-sphinx-tabs Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: Ruby, Perl, Haskell, R, Ocaml, C/C++, fonts, Java, SugarActivity, PHP Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- 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 Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
