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 bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 2056369 - Review Request: python-colcon-alias - Extension for colcon to create and modify command aliases
Summary: Review Request: python-colcon-alias - Extension for colcon to create and modi...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jakub Kadlčík
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2022-02-21 05:26 UTC by Scott K Logan
Modified: 2022-11-16 02:37 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2022-11-07 16:28:28 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:
jkadlcik: fedora-review+


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Fedora Pagure releng/fedora-scm-requests issue 48866 0 None None None 2022-11-06 02:38:07 UTC
Github colcon colcon-alias pull 3 0 None open Update project URL and improve README.rst 2022-10-20 01:07:29 UTC

Description Scott K Logan 2022-02-21 05:26:31 UTC
Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/python-colcon-alias/python-colcon-alias.spec
SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/python-colcon-alias/python-colcon-alias-0.0.2-1.fc37.src.rpm

Description:
An extension for colcon-core to create and modify command aliases.

Fedora Account System Username: cottsay
Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=83111348
Target branches: rawhide f36 f35 epel8 epel7

This spec file is intended to follow the same pattern as the other 38 `colcon` packages already in Fedora.

Comment 1 Jakub Kadlčík 2022-10-07 23:17:09 UTC
Hello Scott,
thank you for the package.


> License:        ASL 2.0

I don't know if it is required yet but we are moving towards SPDX
license names, which would be Apache-2.0 according to
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/legal/allowed-licenses/


> URL:            https://colcon.readthedocs.io

I am thinking about whether we should rather use
https://github.com/colcon/colcon-alias

I went to the colon.readthedocs.io URL browsed it a little and
couldn't find any information about the colcon-alias extension.


> %description
> An extension for colcon-core to create and modify command aliases.

Can you please write 2-3 sentences about the package here? It's not
clear to me what it does and how it works.


> This spec file is intended to follow the same pattern as the other 38
> `colcon` packages already in Fedora. 

I wanted to point out a couple of non-standard things in the spec but
adhering to the boilerplate of other colcon packages makes a lot of
sense and it is IMHO a better idea than nitpicking, so otherwise LGTM.

Comment 2 Scott K Logan 2022-10-11 22:36:36 UTC
Thank you very much for the detailed review, Jakub.

> I don't know if it is required yet but we are moving towards SPDX license names...

A blog post[1] by Matthew Miller in July indicates that the new identifiers should be used "going forward", however I can't find a documented consensus for dealing with older branches like EPEL 7, or even what qualifies as an "old branch". Given that we haven't switched existing packages to the new identifiers yet, I'm inclined to move forward with the old identifier here to maintain a uniform spec. Another note, it doesn't look like rpmlint fully supports the new identifiers yet either. I am excited for this change, though!

> I am thinking about whether we should rather use https://github.com/colcon/colcon-alias

My instinct is typically to follow the maintainer's lead and take the URL directly from the setup.cfg[2]. In this case, I'm the upstream maintainer! Using colcon.readthedocs.io made sense for many of the more "core" extensions that are documented there, but as the ecosystem grows, we will continue to encounter extensions which aren't documented there. I think this request makes sense - and I'll update the setup.cfg as well.

> Can you please write 2-3 sentences about the package here?

This is another reasonable request that I should implement upstream in the setup.cfg or README.md and then pull that change in here.

> I wanted to point out a couple of non-standard things in the spec but adhering to the boilerplate of other colcon packages makes a lot of sense and it is IMHO a better idea than nitpicking, so otherwise LGTM.

I appreciate this. There are a lot of colcon packages. I intend to update all of the packages to use more modern spec files at some point, but much of that is complicated by maintaining EPEL 7 branches of nearly all of the colcon packages.

Thanks again - I'll implement the URL and description changes and report back when that's been released and updated in this spec.

[1] https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/important-changes-to-software-license-information-in-fedora-packages-spdx-and-more/
[2] https://github.com/colcon/colcon-alias/blob/main/setup.cfg#L4

Comment 3 Jakub Kadlčík 2022-10-13 20:02:45 UTC
> Given that we haven't switched existing packages to the new
> identifiers yet, I'm inclined to move forward with the old identifier
> here to maintain a uniform spec. 

That makes sense, no problem here :-)


> however I can't find a documented consensus for dealing with older
> branches like EPEL 7, or even what qualifies as an "old branch" 

Incidentally, I've talked with @msuchy about this and it looks like we
will be able to use SPDX even for old branches. But I don't have any
more details.

Comment 4 Scott K Logan 2022-11-04 23:58:18 UTC
Upstream change was reviewed and merged, and I updated the spec to include a new URL and description.

Spec URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/python-colcon-alias/python-colcon-alias.spec
SRPM URL: https://cottsay.fedorapeople.org/python-colcon-alias/python-colcon-alias-0.0.2-1.fc38.src.rpm

Description:
An extension for colcon-core to create and modify command aliases.

Aliases condense any number of colcon command invocations made up of a verb
followed by all associated arguments down to another 'alias' verb. When
invoking the alias verb, additional arguments can be appended to the original
invocations.

Koji scratch build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=93803621
Target branches: rawhide f37 f36 f35 epel9 epel8 epel7

Thanks!

Comment 5 Jakub Kadlčík 2022-11-06 01:43:35 UTC
Hello Scott,
thank you for the changes.


> Release:        1%{?dist}
> * Fri Nov 04 2022 Scott K Logan <logans> - 0.0.2-2

Looks like you forgot to increment the release number :-)



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: "*No copyright* Apache License 2.0", "Unknown or generated",
     "*No copyright* Apache License", "Apache License 2.0". 5 files have
     unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in
     /home/jkadlcik/2056369-python-colcon-alias/licensecheck.txt
[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 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]: 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]: 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
[x]: Binary eggs must be removed in %prep

===== 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).
[?]: 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.
[?]: 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:
[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
-------
Cannot parse rpmlint output:


Rpmlint (installed packages)
----------------------------
============================ 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
checks: 31, packages: 1

python3-colcon-alias.noarch: W: files-duplicate /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/colcon_alias-0.0.2-py3.11.egg-info/zip-safe /usr/lib/python3.11/site-packages/colcon_alias-0.0.2-py3.11.egg-info/dependency_links.txt
 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 badness; has taken 0.0 s



Source checksums
----------------
https://github.com/colcon/colcon-alias/archive/0.0.2/colcon-alias-0.0.2.tar.gz :
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package     : db43a013de3d71a96a22ad4b212a748822082e3bb7093e1ab30b91b9e98b3bd3
  CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : db43a013de3d71a96a22ad4b212a748822082e3bb7093e1ab30b91b9e98b3bd3


Requires
--------
python3-colcon-alias (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered):
    python(abi)
    python3.11dist(colcon-core)
    python3.11dist(filelock)
    python3.11dist(pyyaml)



Provides
--------
python3-colcon-alias:
    python-colcon-alias
    python3-colcon-alias
    python3.11-colcon-alias
    python3.11dist(colcon-alias)
    python3dist(colcon-alias)



Generated by fedora-review 0.9.0 (6761b6c) last change: 2022-08-23
Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 2056369
Buildroot used: fedora-rawhide-x86_64
Active plugins: Generic, Shell-api, Python
Disabled plugins: Perl, PHP, R, Java, SugarActivity, C/C++, Haskell, Ocaml, fonts
Disabled flags: EPEL6, EPEL7, DISTTAG, BATCH, EXARCH

Comment 6 Scott K Logan 2022-11-06 02:38:08 UTC
> Looks like you forgot to increment the release number :-)

Ah, good catch. I've fixed it locally so the imported package will be correct.

Thanks!

Comment 7 Jens Petersen 2022-11-07 11:34:38 UTC
The Pagure repository was created at https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-colcon-alias

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 16:26:03 UTC
FEDORA-2022-e90b080493 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-e90b080493

Comment 9 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 16:28:28 UTC
FEDORA-2022-e90b080493 has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 10 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 18:41:33 UTC
FEDORA-2022-406bd5b5a3 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-406bd5b5a3

Comment 11 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 18:41:34 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60a6d17dd9 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 8. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60a6d17dd9

Comment 12 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 18:41:35 UTC
FEDORA-2022-f951710260 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f951710260

Comment 13 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 18:41:36 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-5570990f03 has been submitted as an update to Fedora EPEL 9. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-5570990f03

Comment 14 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 20:59:16 UTC
FEDORA-2022-f951710260 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-f951710260 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f951710260

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 15 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 21:06:55 UTC
FEDORA-2022-07430c3f24 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-07430c3f24 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-07430c3f24

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 16 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 21:42:43 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-5570990f03 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-5570990f03

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 17 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 21:52:10 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60a6d17dd9 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60a6d17dd9

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 18 Fedora Update System 2022-11-07 22:01:03 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-81289efb63 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 testing repository.

You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2022-81289efb63

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 19 Fedora Update System 2022-11-08 10:12:02 UTC
FEDORA-2022-406bd5b5a3 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf install --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2022-406bd5b5a3 \*`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-406bd5b5a3

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 20 Fedora Update System 2022-11-15 01:22:58 UTC
FEDORA-2022-f951710260 has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 21 Fedora Update System 2022-11-15 01:27:11 UTC
FEDORA-2022-07430c3f24 has been pushed to the Fedora 35 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 22 Fedora Update System 2022-11-15 02:49:25 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-5570990f03 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 23 Fedora Update System 2022-11-15 03:03:13 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-60a6d17dd9 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 24 Fedora Update System 2022-11-15 03:12:13 UTC
FEDORA-EPEL-2022-81289efb63 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 25 Fedora Update System 2022-11-16 02:37:35 UTC
FEDORA-2022-406bd5b5a3 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


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