https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188273 Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review? Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #1 from Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- This package looks quite good overall. I have some advice on enabling the tests, and some small but verbose suggestions. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - 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. Note: Unversionned Python dependency found. See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging- guidelines/Python/#_dependencies This one appears to be a simple typo; please replace BuildRequires: python-sphinx-latex with BuildRequires: python3-sphinx-latex - You can and should enable the tests. Add the following: # Import memory_profiler only when it is enabled # https://github.com/Belval/pdf2image/pull/269 Patch: %{forgeurl}/pull/269.patch Add “-p1” after %forgeautosetup. Change %pytest to %pytest tests.py Then change the build conditional. In theory, you could parallelize the tests with pytest-xdist, but looking very casually at tests.py leads me to suspect that there might be race conditions due to different tests using the same output filenames. - When there is a single source and you are using %autosetup/%forgeautosetup, there is no reason to number it. You can change “Source0:” to ”Source:”. - The “forge” macros are not well-maintained anymore. While it is still permissible to use them, you might consider dropping them since they do not really simplify the package much. See a recent devel mailing list discussion: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/XW4DTWOAT4IGQUKZTSQSVU2NLQTASQTW/#XW4DTWOAT4IGQUKZTSQSVU2NLQTASQTW You could remove lines %global forgeurl https://github.com/Belval/pdf2image %global tag v.%{version} and %forgemeta and change URL: %{forgeurl} Source: %{forgesource} # Import memory_profiler only when it is enabled # https://github.com/Belval/pdf2image/pull/269 Patch: %{forgeurl}/pull/269.patch to URL: https://github.com/Belval/pdf2image Source: %{url}/archive/v.%{version}/pdf2image-v.%{version}.tar.gz # Import memory_profiler only when it is enabled # https://github.com/Belval/pdf2image/pull/269 Patch: %{url}/pull/269.patch and %forgeautosetup -p1 to %autosetup -n pdf2image-v.%{version} -p1 None of this is mandatory, since the macros aren’t really deprecated yet, but I don’t think much is lost by omitting them. - You copied this from me, and it’s not causing any problems for now, but I’ve learned that it’s better not to assume that %{_smp_mflags} is just -j<number>. Instead of SPHINXOPTS='%{?_smp_mflags}', we’re better off writing SPHINXOPTS='-j%{?_smp_build_ncpus}'. ===== 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", "MIT License", "*No copyright* MIT License". 35 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/Downloads/review/2188273-python- pdf2image/licensecheck.txt Yes, license is *SPDX* MIT. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. $ rpm -qL -p results/python3-pdf2image-1.16.3-1.fc39.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/pdf2image-1.16.3.dist-info/LICENSE [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. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 10240 bytes in 1 files. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines (unless otherwise 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: 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 must own all directories that it creates. [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 (unless otherwise noted) [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [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). [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in python3-pdf2image [x]: Package functions as described. (If I modify the spec file to enable the tests, they pass.) [x]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. (tested with a manual scratch build) [!]: %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-pdf2image-1.16.3-1.fc39.noarch.rpm python-pdf2image-doc-1.16.3-1.fc39.noarch.rpm python-pdf2image-1.16.3-1.fc39.src.rpm =============================================== rpmlint session starts =============================================== rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp465fi6sz')] checks: 31, packages: 3 ================ 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.4 s ================ Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-legacy-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora-spdx-licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 31, packages: 2 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/Belval/pdf2image/archive/v.1.16.3/pdf2image-v.1.16.3.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 2446eb14dfd491e4930521ea532706fff86f25e78783f7af84c05a9344153491 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 2446eb14dfd491e4930521ea532706fff86f25e78783f7af84c05a9344153491 Requires -------- python3-pdf2image (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3.11dist(pillow) python-pdf2image-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): poppler Provides -------- python3-pdf2image: python-pdf2image python3-pdf2image python3.11-pdf2image python3.11dist(pdf2image) python3dist(pdf2image) python-pdf2image-doc: python-pdf2image-doc Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2188273 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: R, Perl, Java, PHP, C/C++, fonts, Haskell, SugarActivity, Ocaml Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2188273 _______________________________________________ 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
