pool/openQA
SHA256
18
0
Fork 4
Code Issues Pull Requests 1 Activity

Test submission Update to 5.1755504216.b51ff4b1 5.1755504216.b51ff4b1 5.1755504216.b51ff4b1 5.1755504216.b51ff4b1 5.1755504216.b51ff4b1 #1

Closed
mkittler wants to merge 0 commits from mkittler/openQA:leap-16.0 into leap-16.0
pull from: mkittler/openQA:leap-16.0
merge into: pool:leap-16.0
Conversation 5 Commits - Files Changed - +43 -27
mkittler commented 2025-08-18 16:38:53 +02:00
Contributor
Copy Link

Project git PR: products/PackageHub#22

Project git PR: https://src.opensuse.org/products/PackageHub/pulls/22
mkittler added 1 commit 2025-08-18 16:38:53 +02:00
Update to 5.1755504216.b51ff4b1 7c41857afb 
5.1755504216.b51ff4b1
5.1755504216.b51ff4b1
5.1755504216.b51ff4b1
5.1755504216.b51ff4b1
mkittler commented 2025-08-18 16:41:37 +02:00
Author
Contributor
Copy Link

This is just a test submission for https://progress.opensuse.org/issues/187356. So don't merge it. Let me know if this submission is not created in the right way, though.

This is just a test submission for https://progress.opensuse.org/issues/187356. So don't merge it. **Let me know if this submission is not created in the right way, though.**
mkittler requested review from opensuse-review-team 2025-08-19 10:23:21 +02:00
smithfarm reviewed 2025-08-26 11:58:02 +02:00
openQA-client-test.spec
@@ -2,3 +2,3 @@
# spec file for package openQA-client-test
#
# Copyright (c) 2025 SUSE LLC and contributors
# Copyright SUSE LLC
smithfarm commented 2025-08-26 11:58:02 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

This is not right. I guess your spec-cleaner is out-of-date.

This is not right. I guess your spec-cleaner is out-of-date.
mkittler commented 2025-09-01 10:11:51 +02:00
Author
Contributor
Copy Link

What value would be correct? To me "SUSE LLC" makes actually sense considering these submissions come (and will continue to come) from a team working at SUSE.

What value would be correct? To me "SUSE LLC" makes actually sense considering these submissions come (and will continue to come) from a team working at SUSE.
smithfarm commented 2025-09-01 11:10:16 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

It should match what's in Factory, and there I see: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/openQA

#
# spec file for package openQA
#
# Copyright (c) 2025 SUSE LLC and contributors
#

If you can get the version without the (c) and without the and contributors through Factory review, then we'll accept it in leap-16.0 too.

It should match what's in Factory, and there I see: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/openSUSE:Factory/openQA ``` # # spec file for package openQA # # Copyright (c) 2025 SUSE LLC and contributors # ``` If you can get the version without the `(c)` and without the `and contributors` through Factory review, then we'll accept it in leap-16.0 too.
👍 1
smithfarm commented 2025-09-01 11:12:09 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

In general, though, it's recommended to keep spec-cleaner up-to-date for smooth review experience.

In general, though, it's recommended to keep spec-cleaner up-to-date for smooth review experience.
mkittler commented 2025-09-01 12:33:25 +02:00
Author
Contributor
Copy Link

Thanks, I guess this won't be a problem for real submissions then. (I only did this one for the sake of testing on my local workstation. The env where the submission script will eventually run is the same as the one where we run the Factory submissions so spec-cleaner should be recent enough.)

Thanks, I guess this won't be a problem for real submissions then. (I only did this one for the sake of testing on my local workstation. The env where the submission script will eventually run is the same as the one where we run the Factory submissions so spec-cleaner should be recent enough.)
autogits_workflow_pr_bot requested review from bigironman 2025-08-28 09:59:04 +02:00
autogits_workflow_pr_bot requested review from legaldb 2025-08-28 09:59:04 +02:00
autogits_workflow_pr_bot requested review from lkocman-factory 2025-08-28 09:59:05 +02:00
autogits_workflow_pr_bot requested review from maxlin_factory 2025-08-28 09:59:05 +02:00
autogits_workflow_pr_bot requested review from smithfarm 2025-08-28 09:59:06 +02:00
legaldb commented 2025-08-28 10:16:07 +02:00
Member
Copy Link

Legal reviewed as acceptable:

Accepted because of no significant difference (462673)
Legal reviewed as [acceptable](https://legaldb.suse.de/reviews/details/463650): ``` Accepted because of no significant difference (462673) ```
report.md
1.4 KiB
legaldb approved these changes 2025-08-28 10:16:08 +02:00
smithfarm commented 2025-09-01 13:13:41 +02:00
Owner
Copy Link

I only did this one for the sake of testing on my local workstation.

OK, closing.

> I only did this one for the sake of testing on my local workstation. OK, closing.
smithfarm closed this pull request 2025-09-01 13:13:41 +02:00

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No Reviewers
bigironman
lkocman-factory
maxlin_factory
smithfarm
legaldb
Labels
Clear labels
legaldb
Critical Priority
Critical legaldb priority
Archived
legaldb
High Priority
2
High legaldb priority
legaldb
Normal Priority
1
Normal legaldb priority
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Assignees
Clear assignees
adamm_super adrianSuSE autobuild-owner autobuild-review autogits_workflow_pr_bot bigironman dirkmueller eroca factory_bot gitea_test legaldb lkocman-factory maxlin_factory opensuse-review packagehub-review smithfarm
No Assignees
3 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: pool/openQA#1
Delete Branch "mkittler/openQA:leap-16.0"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?