Dne 31. 03. 22 v 1:12 Ben Greiner napsal(a):
I don't see any agreement to that effect in that discussion. There is just the notion that it is not that useful for us, so we won't use it.
It doesn't help with the BuildRequirements for the obs resolver at all. And when you list the BuildRequirements manually, why not also list the runtime requirements and have a proper human review for them?
100% agree.
Not using the macro will not allow you to ignore errors in the metadata. With bad metadata, you will run into pkg_resources and importlib metadata errors soon enough.
You are right, and I stand corrected. We have to fix those upstream metadata anyway. Grr.
In the specific case linked by you, the problem is a pattern I have seen tens of times in the last couple of weeks: The rpm packager for subprocess-tee forgot to BuildRequire setuptools_scm and toml/tomli. These are usually specified in setup.py or pyproject.toml as build requirement `setuptools_scm[toml]` and serve as version determinators for the metadata to be installed. Without it, the version becomes 0.0.0 and that is what the generator found. Not upstream's fault at all.
Not only setuptools_scm, but even setuptools_scm_git_archive! Crazy. However, yes, your analysis was correct, and yes, it is useful to check what actually build package provides.
If you stop to put catchall lines into the %files section but list a proper %{python_sitelib}/%{module}-%{version}*-info you catch such errors during packaging. I encourage everyone to do it.
YES! I think somebody should really allocate time to update py2pack, it is severely outdated.
You have to sync the rpm metadata with the egg/dist-metadata or you will run into aforementioned pkg_resources/importlib errors again and again. See many of the currently failing packages in Staging:M due to a docutils update, which is not compatible with Sphinx. So you either have to unpin the upper bounds in the setup.* or requirements files or work them into the rpm packages.
I stand corrected.
If you properly sync the metadata, and you must, there is no need to remove the generator. Although, as already said, the generator is not very useful within the context of the openbuildservice.
You are right, removal of all those lines of Requires: could make a spec file slightly shorter, so perhaps it is not pure cost. We can try to play with it. Best, Matěj -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mcepl@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 Quod fuimus, estis; quod sumus, vos eritis.