https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2244587 Benson Muite <benson_muite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ |needinfo?(benson_muite@emai | |lplus.org) | Status|ASSIGNED |POST --- Comment #9 from Benson Muite <benson_muite@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== 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". 30 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fedora/2244587-python-simple- websocket/licensecheck.txt [ ]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [ ]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [ ]: 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 [ ]: 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. [ ]: 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. [ ]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [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]: 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]: The License field must be a valid SPDX expression. [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]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Python: [-]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep Note: Cannot find any build in BUILD directory (--prebuilt option?) [-]: Python eggs must not download any dependencies during the build process. [-]: A package which is used by another package via an egg interface should provide egg info. [ ]: Package meets the Packaging Guidelines::Python [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 ===== 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-simple-websocket [ ]: 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. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [ ]: %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: [!]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Note: Spec file as given by url is not the same as in SRPM (see attached diff). See: (this test has no URL) [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm python-simple-websocket-doc-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm python-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc40.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/tmpzqbbbj30')] checks: 31, packages: 3 python3-simple-websocket.noarch: W: no-documentation 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.3 s Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.4.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.12/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 python3-simple-websocket.noarch: W: no-documentation 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.1 s Source checksums ---------------- https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket/archive/v1.0.0/simple-websocket-1.0.0.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : fb99a26c97146c806fa6fd3e074fb4d0e84d6706c45e6c728b80188b6eddd26c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : fb99a26c97146c806fa6fd3e074fb4d0e84d6706c45e6c728b80188b6eddd26c Requires -------- python3-simple-websocket (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) python3.12dist(wsproto) python-simple-websocket-doc (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- python3-simple-websocket: python-simple-websocket python3-simple-websocket python3.12-simple-websocket python3.12dist(simple-websocket) python3dist(simple-websocket) python-simple-websocket-doc: python-simple-websocket-doc Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/fedora/2244587-python-simple-websocket/srpm/python-simple-websocket.spec 2023-10-26 16:59:15.200618841 +0000 +++ /home/fedora/2244587-python-simple-websocket/srpm-unpacked/python-simple-websocket.spec 2023-10-17 00:00:00.000000000 +0000 @@ -7,5 +7,5 @@ Name: python-simple-websocket Version: 1.0.0 -Release: 3%{?dist} +Release: 2%{?dist} Summary: Simple WebSocket server and client for Python @@ -13,8 +13,11 @@ License: MIT URL: https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket -Source: %{url}/archive/v%{version}/simple-websocket-%{version}.tar.gz +Source0: https://github.com/miguelgrinberg/simple-websocket/archive/refs/tags/v%{version}/simple-websocket-%{version}.tar.gz + +# Patch out test coverage analysis +# https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_linters +Patch0: omit-coverage-tests.patch BuildRequires: python3-devel -BuildRequires: %{py3_dist pytest} # Documentation @@ -50,5 +53,5 @@ %generate_buildrequires -%pyproject_buildrequires +%pyproject_buildrequires -t @@ -77,5 +80,4 @@ %files doc -%license LICENSE %doc CHANGES.md %doc README.md @@ -87,9 +89,4 @@ %changelog -* Wed Oct 18 2023 Sandro Mani <manisandro@xxxxxxxxx> - 1.0.0-3 -- Simplify source URLs -- Add LICENSE to -doc -- BR pytest directly, drop coverage patch - * Tue Oct 17 2023 Sandro Mani <manisandro@xxxxxxxxx> - 1.0.0-2 - Use GitHub source Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2244587 Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-aarch64 Active plugins: Python, Generic, Shell-api Disabled plugins: C/C++, R, SugarActivity, Perl, PHP, Haskell, fonts, Java, Ocaml Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH Comments: a) $ rpm -qL python3-simple-websocket-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages/simple_websocket-1.0.0.dist-info/LICENSE /usr/share/licenses/python3-simple-websocket/LICENSE $ rpm -qL python-simple-websocket-doc-1.0.0-2.fc40.noarch.rpm Please change last section from: %files -n python3-simple-websocket -f %{pyproject_files} %license LICENSE %files doc %doc CHANGES.md %doc README.md %if %{with doc_pdf} %doc docs/_build/latex/simple-websocket.pdf %endif %doc examples/ to %files -n python3-simple-websocket -f %{pyproject_files} %doc README.md %files doc %license LICENSE %doc CHANGES.md %if %{with doc_pdf} %doc docs/_build/latex/simple-websocket.pdf %endif %doc examples/ because the doc package does not require the main package and should have license information. and the README will be helpful as minimal documentation when the main package is installed without the doc package. You may optionally choose to put CHANGES.md with the main package. b) Approved. -- 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=2244587 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202244587%23c9 _______________________________________________ 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
