Would be nice to add a short description :-)

Any specific reason for this? I could sort of understand 0.0.1 - 0.0 seems weird :-)

Pre-release, @sochotni. :)

I tried running $ fedora-review -n waiverdb after building the .src.rpm here and it failed to run the tests in the %check section.

It looks like you may need to include the tests/ directory in the tarball with a MANIFEST.in file or some change to setup.py.

Try iterating on this with the fedora-review tool until it returns few or no errors.

I tried running $ fedora-review -n waiverdb after building the .src.rpm here and it failed to run the tests in the %check section.
It looks like you may need to include the tests/ directory in the tarball with a MANIFEST.in file or some change to setup.py.
Try iterating on this with the fedora-review tool until it returns few or no errors.

Thanks, fedora-review is new to me, :-)

I have updated the patch to make fedora-review happy.

:+1: for me. This looks like a good baseline to iterate on.

fedora-review is new to me, :-)

Yeah! @sochotni wrote it like 1000 years ago. :fireworks:

I don't want to take credit for something I didn't do so - originally fedora-review was created by Tim Lauridsen :-)

See: https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/blob/master/f/AUTHORS

Also: :+1:

Conflicts here.

Also :+1: from me but I guess we need to sort out the issue with mock on the Jenkins slaves before we can hit the button here.

Also 👍 from me but I guess we need to sort out the issue with mock on the Jenkins slaves before we can hit the button here.

The issue with mock has been sorted out, :v: