https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1046959 --- Comment #5 from Christopher Meng <cickumqt@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Michael Scherer from comment #4) > 1) I fail to understand what you mean by "doesn't pass first on SPEC > itself", can you clarify ? I review packages first from SPEC, if spec is not fine, the review of course will generate many problems. SPEC should be bascially correct. > I will post a updated with 0.0.2 shortly, didn't see there was a new version > since I posted it. Fine. > 2) for %configure, likely a wrong cut and paste, will remove it in the > nextiteration. Fine. > 3) I didn't report a bug, because this is not a bug. > %check is not usable because it requires the source code of gtest directly, > ie it likly use a non public API by using internals of gtest.cc. And so > asking to gtest to distribute the code as part of the rpm would likely make > others people use it ( so make it public while it likely shouldn't ), which > will them be a hack and quite fragile. I will not ask the package to carry a > non public API just for a test. Yes, but you should mention this in the initial comment so that we won't waste time here. Nice to see you have time, so update the bug and I will review it formally. -- 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 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review