https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2311762 --- Comment #16 from Daniel Berrangé <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> --- > [ ]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate > file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. > > danpb: I guess you need to ask them about this? The LICENSE file is present, i just forgot to add %license tag to reference it :-( > [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. > Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in > CppMicroServices-devel , CppMicroServices-docs Opps, yes, needs fixing > [!]: Latest version is packaged. > > danpb: You need to package 3.8.5 (latest upstream). Will do > [-]: Sources are verified with gpgverify first in %prep if upstream > publishes signatures. > Note: gpgverify is not used. No source tarballs are published, we use github autogenerated tarballs > [-]: %check is present and all tests pass. > > No tests upstream! Actually tests are available upstream, but they failed to compile previously. With 3.8.5 they appear to compile at least, so I'll try and get them working in the RPM %check -- You are receiving this mail because: You are always notified about changes to this product and component You are on the CC list for the bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2311762 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202311762%23c16 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
