https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1902429
--- Comment #3 from Jani Juhani Sinervo <[email protected]> --- This took a little while. But it should be better now. > - Please change the source URL to a version that includes a name in the > tarball. Done. Also updated to a snapshot with the license in there. > - Consider adding one or more of NEWS, README, and README.md to %doc. I think > all of them contain valuable information. Done. > - Is there any way of running a basic test of some kind in %check, just to > verify that the package isn't completely broken? I realize we don't have > buttercup in Fedora. I'm just wondering if something can be done to catch > complete breakage. Not sure if there are any tests there that could be conceivably be done without buttercup. Although if it ever gets packaged, I would probably add a %check to run the tests. Anyway, here are the changed things: Spec URL: https://sham1.xyz/files/rpm-review/emacs-lua/emacs-lua.spec SRPM URL: https://sham1.xyz/files/rpm-review/emacs-lua/emacs-lua-20201010-1.20210121git2d9a468.fc34.src.rpm And here's a scratch-build: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=66112704 -- 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 -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
