Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at
Bug 1215261 - Review Request: pytimeparse - Time expression parser
Summary: Review Request: pytimeparse - Time expression parser
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Haïkel Guémar
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
: 1687619 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2015-04-24 19:38 UTC by Pradeep Kilambi
Modified: 2019-03-12 01:05 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2015-10-13 17:03:53 UTC
Type: Bug
karlthered: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Comment 1 Haïkel Guémar 2015-04-27 13:47:30 UTC
1. package name should be python-pytimeparse
2. drop unnecessary stuff like Group tag, %clean section or %defattr
3. use %{__python2} and %{python2_sitelib} macros
4. fill properly %files section,using the installation file generated by is hiding important informations.
5. trim %description, it's not useful for users
6. missing BuildRequires: python2-devel.

Comment 2 Pradeep Kilambi 2015-04-27 14:26:57 UTC
Thanks Haikel. Addressed your comments:

Spec URL:

Comment 3 Haïkel Guémar 2015-05-05 13:05:02 UTC
1. please rename the attached spec too (besides, it's different from the one in spec)
2. use %{__python2} and %{python2_sitelib} macros <= blocker (as python3 will be default in the future, versioned macros are to be preferred)
3. cleaning buildroot is not needed, drop it from %install too
4. drop Group tag

3. and 4. mostly RHEL/CentOS 6 support is not needed

When these will be done, please needinfo me ( preferred) and it'll be approved (I already reviewed the code, licensing issues, testing deployment and usage in chrooted env)

Comment 5 Haïkel Guémar 2015-05-06 15:18:05 UTC
2 remaining issues, but I trust you to fix them before importing

* URL has a small typo: correct one is{pypi_name}/%{pypi_name}-%{version}.tar.gz
* sed -i s/rm -rf %{buildroot}//g' python-pytimeparse.spec => not needed and against guidelines

Then I hereby approve it into Fedora Package Collection, please submit a SCM request.

Package Review

[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed

===== MUST items =====

[x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
     other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
[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 %doc.
[x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
     Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found:
     "MIT/X11 (BSD like)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown
     license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/haikel/1215261-python-
[x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[x]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
     beginning of %install.
     Note: rm -rf %{buildroot} present but not required
[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
[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]: 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]: 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]: 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 use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package do not use a name that already exist
[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
[x]: File names are valid UTF-8.
[x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local

[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 =====

[!]: Sources can be downloaded from URI in Source: tag
     Note: Could not download Source0:
[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.
[x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented.
     Note: Package contains tarball without URL, check comments
[-]: 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
[-]: %check is present and all tests pass.
[x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files.
[x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file
[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
[x]: Dist tag is present (not strictly required in GL).
[x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin.
[x]: SourceX is a working URL.
[x]: Spec use %global instead of %define unless justified.

===== EXTRA items =====

[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.

Checking: python-pytimeparse-1.1.4-1.fc23.noarch.rpm
python-pytimeparse.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.1.4 ['1.1.4-1.fc23', '1.1.4-1']
python-pytimeparse.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pytimeparse/tests/ 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-pytimeparse.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pytimeparse/ 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-pytimeparse.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pytimeparse/ 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-pytimeparse.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pytimeparse/tests/ 0644L /usr/bin/env
python-pytimeparse.src:6: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 1, tab: line 6)
python-pytimeparse.src: W: invalid-url Source0: HTTP Error 404: Not Found
2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 4 errors, 3 warnings.

python-pytimeparse (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):


Comment 6 Pradeep Kilambi 2015-05-06 16:12:02 UTC
New Package SCM Request
Package Name:           python-pytimeparse
Short Description:      Python time expression parse library
Upstream URL:      
Owners:                 pkilambi
Branches:               f20 f21 f22 epel7
InitialCC:              pkilambi

Comment 7 Gwyn Ciesla 2015-05-08 16:59:53 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 8 Pradeep Kilambi 2015-05-14 23:08:40 UTC
packages built successfully. I don't see NEXTRELEASE option, so moving to RELEASE_PENDING.

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2015-05-15 13:56:31 UTC
python-pytimeparse-1.1.4-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2015-05-15 13:58:18 UTC
python-pytimeparse-1.1.4-1.fc21 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 21.

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2015-05-16 10:31:28 UTC
python-pytimeparse-1.1.4-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 testing repository.

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2015-08-04 19:29:50 UTC
python-pytimeparse-1.1.5-1.fc22 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 22.

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2015-10-13 17:03:51 UTC
python-pytimeparse-1.1.5-1.fc22 has been pushed to the Fedora 22 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 14 Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 2019-03-12 01:05:13 UTC
*** Bug 1687619 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.