https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1662572 --- Comment #1 from Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain(a)gmail.com&gt; --- New Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-aiohttp-socks.spec New SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-aiohttp-socks-0... -- 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=1662572 Fabian Affolter <mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch Assignee|nobody(a)fedoraproject.org |mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch Flags| |fedora-review? --- Comment #3 from Fabian Affolter <mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch&gt; --- Package Review ============== Legend: [x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed - aiohttp is a requirement https://github.com/romis2012/aiohttp-socks/blob/master/setup.py - RPMlint issues (see output) - Tests are available but no %check section ===== 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: "*No copyright* Apache License (v2.0)", "Unknown or generated". 10 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/fab/Documents/repos/reviews/1662572-python-aiohttp- socks/licensecheck.txt [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/lib/python3.6/site- packages, /usr/lib/python3.6 [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. [-]: 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 [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]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [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 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 [x]: Package contains BR: python2-devel or python3-devel [x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep ===== 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]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [-]: %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: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. Rpmlint ------- Checking: python-aiohttp-socks-0.2.2-1.fc28.noarch.rpm python-aiohttp-socks-0.2.2-1.fc28.src.rpm python-aiohttp-socks.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-aiohttp-socks/README.md 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- sh: /usr/bin/python: No such file or directory python-aiohttp-socks.noarch: W: invalid-url URL: https://pypi.org/project/aiohttp-socks/ <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known> python-aiohttp-socks.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/share/doc/python-aiohttp-socks/README.md 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings. Requires -------- python-aiohttp-socks (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): python(abi) Provides -------- python-aiohttp-socks: python-aiohttp-socks python3.6dist(aiohttp-socks) python3dist(aiohttp-socks) Source checksums ---------------- https://files.pythonhosted.org/packages/source/a/aiohttp_socks/aiohttp_so... : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : eebd8939a7c3c1e3e7e1b2552c60039b4c65ef6b8b2351efcbdd98290538e310 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : eebd8939a7c3c1e3e7e1b2552c60039b4c65ef6b8b2351efcbdd98290538e310 Generated by fedora-review 0.6.1 (f03e4e7) last change: 2016-05-02 Package APPROVED -- 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=1662572 Hirotaka Wakabayashi <hiwkby(a)yahoo.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |hiwkby(a)yahoo.com --- Comment #5 from Hirotaka Wakabayashi <hiwkby(a)yahoo.com&gt; --- Hello, this is an unofficial and an additional review to #3. Summary ======== 1. Koji scratch build succeeded 2. Package Naming 3. Package Dependencies 4. Provides 5. Source Appendix 1: "diff" with my locally edited spec file Details ======== 1. Koji scratch build succeeded --------------------------------- https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=32254139 Here is the reference to run a koji scratch build. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_the_Koji_build_system#Scratch_Builds 2. Package Naming ------------------ The current binary rpm name, python-aiohttp-socks, must be python3-aiohttp-socks. I think "%files" in python-aiohttp-socks.spec should be "%files -n python3-%{pypi_name}". See the "diff" with locally edited spec file of mine for details. The following guideline will help you. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_naming 3. Package Dependencies ------------------------ This package requires python3-aiohttp package. I think you should add "%{?python_enable_dependency_generator}" to you spec file. See the "diff" with locally edited spec file of mine for details. "Automatically generated dependencies" in Python guideline will help you. See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_automa... "All package dependencies (build-time or runtime, regular, weak or otherwise) MUST ALWAYS be satisfiable within the official Fedora repositories." See https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_package_depen... 4. Provides ------------ "Provides: python3-aiohttp-socks" is needed because this package will be pulled in as build dependencies using the package name. "%python_provide" macro will help you. See the following guideline. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_provides 5. Source Reference -------------------- SourceX is usually used because source files can be multiple. I think Source0 is better in this case. https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/SourceURL/ Appendix 1: "diff" with my locally edited spec file ---------------------------------------------------- Here is the diff between the original spec file in #2 and my locally edited spec file for your reference.:: $ diff -c python-aiohttp-socks.spec.orig python-aiohttp-socks.spec *** python-aiohttp-socks.spec.orig 2019-01-26 06:51:27.077180489 +0000 --- python-aiohttp-socks.spec 2019-01-26 06:53:21.317238974 +0000 *************** *** 10,25 **** License: ASL 2.0 URL: https://pypi.org/project/aiohttp-socks/ ! Source: %{pypi_source} BuildArch: noarch %description %{_description} %package -n python3-%{pypi_name} Summary: %{summary} BuildRequires: python3-devel BuildRequires: python3-setuptools %description -n python3-%{pypi_name} %{_description} --- 10,27 ---- License: ASL 2.0 URL: https://pypi.org/project/aiohttp-socks/ ! Source0: %{pypi_source} BuildArch: noarch + %{?python_enable_dependency_generator} %description %{_description} %package -n python3-%{pypi_name} Summary: %{summary} BuildRequires: python3-devel BuildRequires: python3-setuptools + %{?python_provide:%python_provide python3-%{srcname}} %description -n python3-%{pypi_name} %{_description} *************** *** 35,41 **** %install %py3_install ! %files %license LICENSE.txt %doc README.md %{python3_sitelib}/%{srcname}/ --- 37,43 ---- %install %py3_install ! %files -n python3-%{pypi_name} %license LICENSE.txt %doc README.md %{python3_sitelib}/%{srcname}/ Thanks in advance. Hirotaka Wakabayashi -- 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=1662572 Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(i.gnatenko.brain@ | |gmail.com) | --- Comment #7 from Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain(a)gmail.com&gt; --- Sorry, I didn't have time lately. I will update this review request tonight. -- 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=1662572 --- Comment #9 from Jonny Heggheim <hegjon(a)gmail.com&gt; --- (In reply to Igor Gnatenko from comment #7) Thanks, I will approve it when you have fixed the feedback in comment 3 and comment 5. -- 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=1662572 --- Comment #10 from Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain(a)gmail.com&gt; --- New Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-aiohttp-socks.spec New SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-aiohttp-socks-0... -- 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=1662572 --- Comment #12 from Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain(a)gmail.com&gt; --- New Spec URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-aiohttp-socks.spec New SRPM URL: https://ignatenkobrain.fedorapeople.org/for-review/python-aiohttp-socks-0... -- 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=1662572 Igor Gnatenko <i.gnatenko.brain(a)gmail.com&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Assignee|mail(a)fabian-affolter.ch |hegjon(a)gmail.com -- 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=1662572 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |MODIFIED --- Comment #15 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- python-aiohttp-socks-0.2.2-1.fc30 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 30. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-5ce677d0a8 -- 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=1662572 Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|MODIFIED |ON_QA --- Comment #17 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- python-aiohttp-socks-0.2.2-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for instructions on how to install test updates. You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2019-5ce677d0a8 -- 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=1662572 --- Comment #19 from Fedora Update System <updates(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; --- python-aiohttp-socks-0.2.2-1.fc30 has been pushed to the Fedora 30 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. -- 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