From Fedora Project Wiki
No edit summary
Line 6: Line 6:
<!-- A sentence or two summarizing what this change is and what it will do. This information is used for the overall changeset summary page for each release. Note that motivation for the change should be in the Benefit to Fedora section below, and this part should answer the question "What?" rather than "Why?". -->
<!-- A sentence or two summarizing what this change is and what it will do. This information is used for the overall changeset summary page for each release. Note that motivation for the change should be in the Benefit to Fedora section below, and this part should answer the question "What?" rather than "Why?". -->


It sometimes happens that Python packages succeed to build with incorrect version metadata.
It sometimes happens that Python packages succeed to build as RPM with incorrect version metadata.
They generate a wrong provide in format `python3dist(...) = 0` and `python3.Xdist(...) = 0`.
They generate a wrong provide in format `python3dist(...) = 0` and `python3.Xdist(...) = 0`.
While version 0 (or equal versions like 0.0 or 0.0.0) is probably technically valid, in most cases this indicates a packaging error.  
While version `0` (or equal versions like `0.0` or `0.0.0`) is probably technically valid, in most cases this indicates a packaging error.  
We propose to prevent this error from happening by explicitly failing the RPM build instead of generating such provides.
We propose to prevent this error from happening by explicitly failing the RPM build instead of generating such provides.


Line 54: Line 54:
* `python3.Xdist(distname) = 0`
* `python3.Xdist(distname) = 0`


Where X is the Python minor version (eg. 10, 11...)
Where X is the Python minor version (eg. 10, 11...).
It does not affect any other provides.
It does not affect any other provides.
More about the provides: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#Machine-readable-provides
More about these provides: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#Machine-readable-provides


''The provides are automatically generated from upstream metadata and sometimes such information s missing due to packaging error. Setuptools generates sometimes 0 which is bad, we agreed and proposed we will not accept the state
The provides generated during the RPM build come from the upstream Python package metadata.
Some Python building backends, eg. setuptools, explicitly allow creating package with version `0.0.0` when the version used by a project is not known. This was [https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/2329 discussed upstream] with conclusion that it's an expected behavior and won't be handled upstream.
In other cases, for example when building package from a particular git commit, the incorrect provide can be generated due to a packaging error.
We've never encountered a situation when packaging the version `0` was the package maintainers intention.
Having researched the possibilities upstream (non feasible), we agreed we'd like to prevent such situations from happening in Fedora.


Setuptools sets this to 0.0.0
https://github.com/pypa/setuptools/issues/2329
packaging from git
no example when someone wanted to package 0.0.0
''


An example of the incorrect provides
An example of the incorrect provides:


  $ rpm -qpP python3-ssh-python-0.10.0-5.fc38.x86_64.rpm                                           
  $ rpm -qpP python3-ssh-python-0.10.0-5.fc38.x86_64.rpm                                           
Line 76: Line 75:
  '''python3dist(ssh-python) = 0'''
  '''python3dist(ssh-python) = 0'''


Why is it bad?
If any package requires `python3-ssh-python > 0.9` (correctly assuming there's `0.10.0` in Fedora's repositories), the automatic dependency generators will not discover the example package, making the other package non-installable.


In January 2022 the [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=python3dist0 umbrella Bugzilla ticket] was created for Python packages providing this incorrect provide:  
In January 2022 the [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/showdependencytree.cgi?id=python3dist0 umbrella Bugzilla ticket] was created for Python packages providing this incorrect provide:  
Line 84: Line 87:
We aim to prevent such situation from happening by increasing the robustness of the python-rpm-generators (namely [https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-generators/blob/rawhide/f/pythondistdeps.py pythondistdeps.py]).
We aim to prevent such situation from happening by increasing the robustness of the python-rpm-generators (namely [https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-generators/blob/rawhide/f/pythondistdeps.py pythondistdeps.py]).
The generator will error and fail the build if `python3dist(...) = 0` was to be generated.
The generator will error and fail the build if `python3dist(...) = 0` was to be generated.
''Based on discussion on Fedora-devel there will be no way to opt out from this. Packagers who want to... encouraged to ask upstream to package at least 0.0.1''
 
Based on discussion on python-devel mailing list there will be no way to opt out from this change. There will be no possibility to package a Python package with version `0`.
Packagers who encounter such need are encouraged to work with upstream to set the version to at least `0.0.1`.


== Feedback ==
== Feedback ==
Line 127: Line 132:
== Scope ==
== Scope ==
* Proposal owners:
* Proposal owners:
# implement & test the change in python-rpm-generators (pythondistdeps.py)
# implement & test the change in python-rpm-generators ([https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/python-rpm-generators/blob/rawhide/f/pythondistdeps.py pythondistdeps.py])
# ...
<!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
<!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->


* Other developers: <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Other developers: <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
** fix the packaging error to generate correct metadata and successful build
** Fix the packaging error to generate correct metadata and successful build. There's no common way to deal with such packages. In most of the cases the issue originates from packaging errors that need to be fixed. Contact the change owners if you need help with the necessary changes to your package.
 
TBD how
''there's no common way to deal with such packages, it's one-by-one issue that originates mostly from packaging errors, ask the change owners if need a way forward''
 
<!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->
<!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release?  Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?-->


Line 143: Line 143:
The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication -->
The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication -->


* Policies and guidelines: ''https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_source_files_from_pypi - this is said here and that's enough even when we change the python RPM generators behavior'' <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
* Policies and guidelines: [https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#_source_files_from_pypi Python Packaging Guidelines] cover the topic of creating the version string. This will be valid even when we change the Python RPM generators behavior <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- Do the packaging guidelines or other documents need to be updated for this feature?  If so, does it need to happen before or after the implementation is done?  If a FPC ticket exists, add a link here. Please submit a pull request with the proposed changes before submitting your Change proposal. -->
<!-- Do the packaging guidelines or other documents need to be updated for this feature?  If so, does it need to happen before or after the implementation is done?  If a FPC ticket exists, add a link here. Please submit a pull request with the proposed changes before submitting your Change proposal. -->


Line 157: Line 157:
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
None.
None.


== How To Test ==
== How To Test ==
Line 175: Line 174:


<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
<!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES -->
TBD
* Prepare a Python package, set the version to `0`
''take package that provides 0 or prepare a package that has a version 0, build RPM, fail, profit''
or
* Use one of the known packages that provide version `0`.
* Try to build an RPM package in a regular way (eg. mockbuild)
* The build should fail.


== User Experience ==
== User Experience ==

Revision as of 15:27, 11 November 2022


Prevent from building RPM packages providing python3dist(...) = 0

Summary

It sometimes happens that Python packages succeed to build as RPM with incorrect version metadata. They generate a wrong provide in format python3dist(...) = 0 and python3.Xdist(...) = 0. While version 0 (or equal versions like 0.0 or 0.0.0) is probably technically valid, in most cases this indicates a packaging error. We propose to prevent this error from happening by explicitly failing the RPM build instead of generating such provides.

Owner

Current status

  • Targeted release: Fedora Linux 38
  • Last updated: 2022-11-11
  • FESCo issue: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
  • Tracker bug: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>
  • Release notes tracker: <will be assigned by the Wrangler>

Detailed Description

This change is about automatic RPM provides in the following form:

  • python3dist(distname) = 0
  • python3.Xdist(distname) = 0

Where X is the Python minor version (eg. 10, 11...). It does not affect any other provides. More about these provides: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Python/#Machine-readable-provides

The provides generated during the RPM build come from the upstream Python package metadata. Some Python building backends, eg. setuptools, explicitly allow creating package with version 0.0.0 when the version used by a project is not known. This was discussed upstream with conclusion that it's an expected behavior and won't be handled upstream. In other cases, for example when building package from a particular git commit, the incorrect provide can be generated due to a packaging error. We've never encountered a situation when packaging the version 0 was the package maintainers intention. Having researched the possibilities upstream (non feasible), we agreed we'd like to prevent such situations from happening in Fedora.


An example of the incorrect provides:

$ rpm -qpP python3-ssh-python-0.10.0-5.fc38.x86_64.rpm                                           
python-ssh-python = 0.10.0-5.fc38
python3-ssh-python = 0.10.0-5.fc38
python3-ssh-python(x86-64) = 0.10.0-5.fc38
python3.11-ssh-python = 0.10.0-5.fc38
python3.11dist(ssh-python) = 0
python3dist(ssh-python) = 0


Why is it bad?

If any package requires python3-ssh-python > 0.9 (correctly assuming there's 0.10.0 in Fedora's repositories), the automatic dependency generators will not discover the example package, making the other package non-installable.

In January 2022 the umbrella Bugzilla ticket was created for Python packages providing this incorrect provide: On Nov 10 2022 there are 22 linked Bugzilla tickets, 13 of which are not closed. New check: 9 packages, in all cases this is wrong The change doesn't affect a big part of the Python ecosystem.

We aim to prevent such situation from happening by increasing the robustness of the python-rpm-generators (namely pythondistdeps.py). The generator will error and fail the build if python3dist(...) = 0 was to be generated.

Based on discussion on python-devel mailing list there will be no way to opt out from this change. There will be no possibility to package a Python package with version 0. Packagers who encounter such need are encouraged to work with upstream to set the version to at least 0.0.1.

Feedback

The idea was posted on python-devel mailing list and received a positive feedback. No alternatives to this approach were proposed.

Benefit to Fedora

The correct metadata is essential for the whole package ecosystem. More deterministic behavior of the generators will bring those benefits:

  • The packages will stop lying about the version they provide.
  • The requirements generators (eg. %pyproject_buildrequires) will correctly evaluate the Build- and Runtime Requirements based on the correct Provides.
  • The package maintainers who BuildRequire %{py3dist pkgname} >= 0.2 in their specfiles will always require the correctly evaluated version.

Scope

  • Proposal owners:
  1. implement & test the change in python-rpm-generators (pythondistdeps.py)
  • Other developers:
    • Fix the packaging error to generate correct metadata and successful build. There's no common way to deal with such packages. In most of the cases the issue originates from packaging errors that need to be fixed. Contact the change owners if you need help with the necessary changes to your package.
  • Release engineering: not needed for this Change
  • Policies and guidelines: Python Packaging Guidelines cover the topic of creating the version string. This will be valid even when we change the Python RPM generators behavior
  • Trademark approval: not needed for this Change
  • Alignment with Objectives: No

Upgrade/compatibility impact

None.

How To Test

  • Prepare a Python package, set the version to 0

or

  • Use one of the known packages that provide version 0.
  • Try to build an RPM package in a regular way (eg. mockbuild)
  • The build should fail.

User Experience

The actual users should notice no difference.

Dependencies

None

Contingency Plan

  • Contingency mechanism: Revert
  • Contingency deadline: Beta freeze
  • Blocks release? No

Documentation

This page is the documentation of this change.

Release Notes