https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2156749 Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(code@musicinmybra | |in.net) | --- Comment #2 from Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Roman Inflianskas from comment #1) > Terrific job! > > There are some nits though. > > I'm not native English speaker, so I asked > https://src.fedoraproject.org/user/pwouters (my collegue at Aiven) to check > language for me. > > Should be fixed: > 1. Missing ")" in the string: `# (some of which have already removed i686 > support.` Fixed: diff --git a/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec b/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec index 2d29902..6cc19af 100644 --- a/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec +++ b/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ Source11: opentelemetry-instrument.1 BuildArch: noarch # https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EncourageI686LeafRemoval # While this package is noarch, excluding i686 unblocks many dependent packages -# (some of which have already removed i686 support. +# (some of which have already removed i686 support). ExcludeArch: %{ix86} BuildRequires: python3-devel > 2. Missing "n" in the string: `OpenTelemetry Celery Instrumentatio`. Fixed: diff --git a/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec b/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec index 6cc19af..148fa6f 100644 --- a/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec +++ b/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec @@ -400,7 +400,7 @@ This library allows tracing requests made by the Botocore library. %package -n python3-opentelemetry-instrumentation-celery -Summary: OpenTelemetry Celery Instrumentatio +Summary: OpenTelemetry Celery Instrumentation Version: %{prerel_version} License: Apache-2.0 > 2. These subpackages are Apache-2.0 licensed (see pyproject.toml), but > specfile doesn't contain this information (while it contains it for all > other subpackages): > {'python3-opentelemetry-distro', > 'python3-opentelemetry-exporter-prometheus-remote-write', > 'python3-opentelemetry-exporter-richconsole', > 'python3-opentelemetry-propagator-ot-trace', > 'python3-opentelemetry-util-http'} This one is subtle. There is a top-level license file LICENSE.BSD3, but nothing ever mentions it. See the comment above the base package’s License field: # Until we get clarification from upstream, # Applicability of BSD-3-Clause license? # https://github.com/open-telemetry/opentelemetry-python-contrib/issues/1531 # we assume that any of the files in the repository may contain code under # LICENSE.BSD3, which is BSD-3-Clause, except for packages that carry their own # LICENSE files. So I’ve assumed that the subpackages where someone bothered to include a LICENSE file with the Apache-2.0 text really are just Apache-2.0, but for the packages you’ve mentioned all I have to go on is the trove classifier, and I’m not quite willing to assume that that isn’t just the “primary” or “effective” license. Therefore these subpackages inherit the “Apache-2.0 AND BSD-3-Clause” License from the base package. Hopefully, upstream will respond to my request to document the exact applicability of the BSD-3-Clause license file, and this will get less confusing and vague. I think the current approach is the best I can do until then. > 3. Missing lines in python3-opentelemetry-instrumentation-dbapi: > ``` > # Ensure we have fully-versioned dependencies (to release) across > subpackages > > # > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/ > #_requiring_base_package > > Requires: python3-opentelemetry-instrumentation = > %{?epoch:%{epoch}:}%{prerel_version}-%{release} > ``` Thanks; good catch! diff --git a/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec b/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec index 148fa6f..ae9aeb3 100644 --- a/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec +++ b/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec @@ -436,6 +436,10 @@ Summary: OpenTelemetry Database API instrumentation Version: %{prerel_version} License: Apache-2.0 +# Ensure we have fully-versioned dependencies (to release) across subpackages +# https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_requiring_base_package +Requires: python3-opentelemetry-instrumentation = %{?epoch:%{epoch}:}%{prerel_version}-%{release} + %description -n python3-opentelemetry-instrumentation-dbapi OpenTelemetry Database API instrumentation. > Can be ignored: > 4. "E: summary-too-long Metapackage for " (these metapackages are > autogenerated). I agree it’s not worth writing these metapackages out by hand just to get a shorter summary. > 5. "W: no-documentation" (summary is enough). Yeah, this is such a weird rpmlint warning. Not every subpackage will have something to include as %doc, even when it isn’t a metapackage with no files at all. > 6. "W: description-shorter-than-summary" (feel free to satisfy rpmlint, but > in my opinion there is no need to repeat yourself in the description). Agreed. I consistently took the summaries from titles of the README.rst files, and the descriptions from the “project.description” in the pyproject.toml files. Sometimes the phrasing happened to differ in a way that made the latter shorter, but that’s not an error. > 7. Issue about python3-sqlalchemy1.3 (I believe it's false positive, since > current version is different and doesn't look deprecated). I agree. I’ve seen this false positive before in other packages. I think it’s just that python3-opentelemetry-instrumentation-sqlalchemy+instruments Requires python3.11dist(sqlalchemy), and both python3-sqlalchemy and python3-sqlalchemy1.3 Provide python3.11dist(sqlalchemy), and that’s enough for rpmlint to think there’s a dependency on the deprecated compat package. Updated submission: Spec URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/20230106/python-opentelemetry-contrib.spec SRPM URL: https://music.fedorapeople.org/20230106/python-opentelemetry-contrib-0.36~b0-1.fc37.src.rpm https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=95805132 -- 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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2156749 _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
