[Bug 2268682] Review Request: python-superqt - Missing widgets and components for PyQt/PySide

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2268682

José Matos <jamatos@xxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|                            |fedora-review+
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
                 CC|                            |jamatos@xxxxxxxx



--- Comment #2 from José Matos <jamatos@xxxxxxxx> ---
The package is approved.

Fix the license issue on import.

Package Review
==============

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated


Issues:
=======
- Dist tag is present.
- There are two files with MIT License
superqt-0.6.2/examples/throttler_demo.py
superqt-0.6.2/src/superqt/utils/_throttler.py

===== 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.
[x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
     Note: No known owner of /usr/lib/python3.12/site-packages,
     /usr/lib/python3.12
[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 2504 bytes in 1 files.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

Python:
[x]: 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:
[x]: 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]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable.
     Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in
     python3-superqt , python3-superqt+pyqt6
[x]: Package functions as described.
[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.
[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)
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages.
     Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).


Rpmlint
-------
Checking: python3-superqt-0.6.2-1.fc41.noarch.rpm
          python3-superqt+pyqt6-0.6.2-1.fc41.noarch.rpm
          python-superqt-0.6.2-1.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/tmp6okhshvq')]
checks: 32, packages: 3

python-superqt.src: E: spelling-error ('macOS', '%description -l en_US macOS ->
ma Cos, mac OS, mac-OS')
python3-superqt+pyqt6.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Metapackage', 'Summary(en_US)
Metapackage -> Meta package, Meta-package, Prepackage')
python3-superqt+pyqt6.noarch: E: spelling-error ('metapackage', '%description
-l en_US metapackage -> meta package, meta-package, prepackage')
python3-superqt.noarch: E: spelling-error ('macOS', '%description -l en_US
macOS -> ma Cos, mac OS, mac-OS')
python3-superqt+pyqt6.noarch: W: no-documentation
==================================================================== 3 packages
and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 1 warnings, 26 filtered, 4 badness; has
taken 0.8 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: 2

python3-superqt.noarch: E: spelling-error ('macOS', '%description -l en_US
macOS -> ma Cos, mac OS, mac-OS')
python3-superqt+pyqt6.noarch: E: spelling-error ('Metapackage', 'Summary(en_US)
Metapackage -> Meta package, Meta-package, Prepackage')
python3-superqt+pyqt6.noarch: E: spelling-error ('metapackage', '%description
-l en_US metapackage -> meta package, meta-package, prepackage')
python3-superqt+pyqt6.noarch: W: no-documentation
 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 3 errors, 1 warnings, 22 filtered, 3
badness; has taken 0.3 s 



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/pyapp-kit/superqt/archive/v0.6.2/superqt-0.6.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     :
97aea462722bbd23e31abad42eaf82ea35236554066672dd8904b3a5a8d8fb8b
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package :
97aea462722bbd23e31abad42eaf82ea35236554066672dd8904b3a5a8d8fb8b


Requires
--------
python3-superqt (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    ((python3.12dist(typing-extensions) < 3.10 or
python3.12dist(typing-extensions) > 3.10) with
python3.12dist(typing-extensions) >= 3.7.4.3)
    python(abi)
    python3.12dist(pygments)
    python3.12dist(qtpy)

python3-superqt+pyqt6 (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3-superqt
    python3.12dist(pyqt6)



Provides
--------
python3-superqt:
    python-superqt
    python3-superqt
    python3.12-superqt
    python3.12dist(superqt)
    python3dist(superqt)

python3-superqt+pyqt6:
    python-superqt+pyqt6
    python3-superqt+pyqt6
    python3.12-superqt+pyqt6
    python3.12dist(superqt[pyqt6])
    python3dist(superqt[pyqt6])



Diff spec file in url and in SRPM
---------------------------------
--- /home/jamatos/tmp/fedora/2268682-python-superqt/srpm/python-superqt.spec   
2024-03-19 20:09:36.472495861 +0000
+++
/home/jamatos/tmp/fedora/2268682-python-superqt/srpm-unpacked/python-superqt.spec
  2024-03-09 00:00:00.000000000 +0000
@@ -1,2 +1,12 @@
+## START: Set by rpmautospec
+## (rpmautospec version 0.6.3)
+## RPMAUTOSPEC: autorelease, autochangelog
+%define autorelease(e:s:pb:n) %{?-p:0.}%{lua:
+    release_number = 1;
+    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 superqt
 %global forgeurl https://github.com/pyapp-kit/superqt
@@ -80,3 +90,6 @@

 %changelog
-%autochangelog
+## START: Generated by rpmautospec
+* Sat Mar 09 2024 Sandro <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> - 0.6.2-1
+- 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 2268682
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Python, Shell-api
Disabled plugins: C/C++, PHP, Java, Haskell, Ocaml, Perl, fonts, R,
SugarActivity
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=2268682

Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202268682%23c2
--
_______________________________________________
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




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux