https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265851 Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #11 from Ben Beasley <code@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- The package is APPROVED; please remove “AND CC-By-4.0” from License on import. Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated Issues: ======= - Dist tag is present. OK: fedora-review is confused by rpmautospec. ===== 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. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "BSD 2-Clause License", "Unknown or generated". 36 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/ben/Downloads/review/2265851-python-trx- python/20240228/2265851-python-trx-python/licensecheck.txt Please remove “AND CC-BY-4.0” from the License expression, since test data files under this license do not contribute to the licenses of the binary RPMs. [-]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.12, /usr/lib/python3.12/site- packages Diagnostic is spurious (fedora-review bug). [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]: 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 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]: 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 1134 bytes in 1 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?) [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]: 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). [x]: Package functions as described. (tests pass) [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise justified. [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream publishes signatures. Note: gpgverify is not used. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %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: [!]: 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) OK: differences are solely due to rpmautospec. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). Rpmlint ------- Checking: python3-trx-python-0.2.9-3.fc41.noarch.rpm python-trx-python-0.2.9-3.fc41.src.rpm =============================================== rpmlint session starts ============================================== rpmlint: 2.5.0 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 rpmlintrc: [PosixPath('/tmp/tmp6msapyen')] checks: 32, packages: 2 python-trx-python.src: E: spelling-error ('tractography', 'Summary(en_US) tractography -> cryptography, cartography, chromatography') python-trx-python.src: E: spelling-error ('tractography', '%description -l en_US tractography -> cryptography, cartography, chromatography') python3-trx-python.noarch: E: spelling-error ('tractography', 'Summary(en_US) tractography -> cryptography, cartography, chromatography') python3-trx-python.noarch: E: spelling-error ('tractography', '%description -l en_US tractography -> cryptography, cartography, chromatography') python-trx-python.spec: W: patch-not-applied Patch0: %{forgeurl}/pull/78.patch ========= 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings, 10 filtered, 4 badness; has taken 1.4 s ========= Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- ============================ rpmlint session starts ============================ rpmlint: 2.5.0 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: 32, packages: 1 python3-trx-python.noarch: E: spelling-error ('tractography', 'Summary(en_US) tractography -> cryptography, cartography, chromatography') python3-trx-python.noarch: E: spelling-error ('tractography', '%description -l en_US tractography -> cryptography, cartography, chromatography') 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 2 errors, 0 warnings, 6 filtered, 2 badness; has taken 0.2 s Source checksums ---------------- https://figshare.com/ndownloader/files/38146098#/gold_standard.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 35a0b633560cc2b0d8ecda885aa72d06385499e0cd1ca11a956b0904c3358f01 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 35a0b633560cc2b0d8ecda885aa72d06385499e0cd1ca11a956b0904c3358f01 https://figshare.com/ndownloader/files/37624151#/trx_from_scratch.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : f98ab6da6a6065527fde4b0b6aa40f07583e925d952182e9bbd0febd55c0f6b2 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : f98ab6da6a6065527fde4b0b6aa40f07583e925d952182e9bbd0febd55c0f6b2 https://figshare.com/ndownloader/files/37624148#/memmap_test_data.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 98ba89d7a9a7baa2d37956a0a591dce9bb4581bd01296ad5a596706ee90a52ef CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 98ba89d7a9a7baa2d37956a0a591dce9bb4581bd01296ad5a596706ee90a52ef https://figshare.com/ndownloader/files/37624154#/DSI.zip : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 1b09ce8b4b47b2600336c558fdba7051218296e8440e737364f2c4b8ebae666c CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 1b09ce8b4b47b2600336c558fdba7051218296e8440e737364f2c4b8ebae666c https://github.com/tee-ar-ex/trx-python/archive/0.2.9/trx-python-0.2.9.tar.gz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : 886a69e1f884536a91dd70ac203561e04eb7dcf3e2d83853cd1a24368499615d CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : 886a69e1f884536a91dd70ac203561e04eb7dcf3e2d83853cd1a24368499615d Requires -------- python3-trx-python (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /usr/bin/python3 python(abi) python3.12dist(deepdiff) python3.12dist(nibabel) python3.12dist(numpy) Provides -------- python3-trx-python: python-trx-python python3-trx-python python3.12-trx-python python3.12dist(trx-python) python3dist(trx-python) Diff spec file in url and in SRPM --------------------------------- --- /home/ben/Downloads/review/2265851-python-trx-python/20240228/2265851-python-trx-python/srpm/python-trx-python.spec 2024-02-28 11:54:08.857617057 -0500 +++ /home/ben/Downloads/review/2265851-python-trx-python/20240228/2265851-python-trx-python/srpm-unpacked/python-trx-python.spec 2024-02-27 19:00:00.000000000 -0500 @@ -1,2 +1,12 @@ +## START: Set by rpmautospec +## (rpmautospec version 0.6.1) +## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog +%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua: + release_number = 3; + base_release_number = tonumber(rpm.expand("%{?-b*}%{!?-b:1}")); + print(release_number + base_release_number - 1); +}%{?-e:.%{-e*}}%{?-s:.%{-s*}}%{!?-n:%{?dist}} +## END: Set by rpmautospec + %global pypi_name trx-python %global forgeurl https://github.com/tee-ar-ex/trx-python @@ -121,3 +131,17 @@ %changelog -%autochangelog +## START: Generated by rpmautospec +* Wed Feb 28 2024 Sandro <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 0.2.9-3 +- Fix URLs and license ref +- Use URLs including file name +- Specify source URL for more information on test data +- Specify license of test data +- Use nice(r) URLs for patches +- Preserve timestamp when installing test files + +* Sat Feb 24 2024 Sandro <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 0.2.9-2 +- Add tests and man pages + +* Sat Feb 24 2024 Sandro <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 0.2.9-1 +- Initial package +## END: Generated by rpmautospec Generated by fedora-review 0.10.0 (e79b66b) last change: 2023-07-24 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2265851 --mock-options=--dnf Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64 Active plugins: Shell-api, Generic, Python Disabled plugins: Haskell, R, PHP, SugarActivity, C/C++, fonts, Java, Ocaml, Perl Disabled flags: EXARCH, EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH -- 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=2265851 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202265851%23c11 -- _______________________________________________ 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
