Bug 1072423 - [ PATCH ] - Provide empty %check explaining why test suite is not executed there
Summary: [ PATCH ] - Provide empty %check explaining why test suite is not executed there
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: apache-commons-codec
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
low
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mat Booth
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-03-04 14:47 UTC by Alexander Todorov
Modified: 2014-03-15 19:38 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-03-15 19:38:14 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
PATCH (308 bytes, patch)
2014-03-04 14:47 UTC, Alexander Todorov
no flags Details | Diff

Description Alexander Todorov 2014-03-04 14:47:43 UTC
Created attachment 870448 [details]
PATCH

Description of problem:


This patch against the spec file provides an empty %check section explaining why test suite is not executed there. For more info see:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Testing_in_check

Comment 1 Mat Booth 2014-03-05 09:14:51 UTC
I disagree that this patch adds any value at all to java packages. This is obvious for anyone who is familiar with java packaging.

Please answer my question asking why it not possible to teach whatever tool you are using to generate this report how to exclude java packages:

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-March/196302.html

Comment 2 Alexander Todorov 2014-03-05 10:23:48 UTC
(In reply to Mat Booth from comment #1)
> I disagree that this patch adds any value at all to java packages. This is
> obvious for anyone who is familiar with java packaging.
> 
> Please answer my question asking why it not possible to teach whatever tool
> you are using to generate this report how to exclude java packages:
> 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-March/196302.html

See
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-March/196322.html

Comment 3 Mat Booth 2014-03-15 19:38:14 UTC
I do not believe there is sufficient rationale for this change, or reason enough to not enhance the reporting tool rather than imposing on package maintainers. The conversation has died on the mailing list leaving questions unanswered.

This patch also introduces an rpmlint warning, so I will not apply it.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.