https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823056
--- Comment #8 from Remi Collet <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #7) > Since these fixes upstream will require a new release (probably 2.0.16), may > I just fix the package.xml in the spec file? Yes, it will allow us to proceed to the review > I will work with upstream on this. Several packages could use this approach. Great > I'm pretty sure this approach would break their unit tests though, Should not. The code sample pasted from Date_Holidays allow to run from source or from installation and is used by lot of pear extensions (pear project run an jenkins server for QA) > Speaking of unit tests, upstream does not include their unit tests in their > PEAR packages (only in their SCM repo). Is that common? Yes. I think you can post a upstream RFE to add test suite in the tarball (role="test") Then, it will become a "must" to run this test suite during %check. I have add such %check in lot of packages, you can look at for example (and usefull tips). Of course I can help you on this feature. This big change will introduce some complexity (more BR) but also more QA. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
