Bug 364211

I had to reacquaint myself with the Ruby guidelines....

One question: This is also available as a gem.  If something ends up needing the
gem, you'll have to abandon this package and submit rubygem-hpricot for review.
 So it's worth asking: are you sure that nothing will want this as a gem, and if
not then wouldn't it be easier to do it all at once?

Regardless, I'll go ahead and review this; a gem package shouldn't be much
different.

I note there's an hpricot-0.6 tarball on the upstream web site, but I don't know
if you'd want to use it.

This package looks fine, save for one thing.  The guidelines spefically state
that you need RuildRequires: ruby.  Currently ruby is only being brought in for
this build because rake has a dependency on /usr/bin/ruby.  I honestly don't
know if this is a real issue.

Review:
* source files match upstream:
   efbb70d4ee6b79a3cbf7dac24f16646c3ab688812cc2f68ffcf6d3e76e826ec4  
   hpricot-0.5.150.tgz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   hpricot_scan.so()(64bit)
   ruby(hpricot) = 0.5.150-2.fc8
   ruby-hpricot = 0.5.150-2.fc8
  =
   libpthread.so.0()(64bit)
   libruby.so.1.8()(64bit)
   ruby(abi) = 1.8

* %check is present and all tests pass:
   ..............................................................
   Finished in 6.535526 seconds.
  (rake test isn't very verbose about successes)
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

? ruby not required
* .rb files stored in sitelib.
* arch specific files stroed in sitearch
* ruby(name) provided
* ruby(abi) required.

Chatted with the primary author of the ruby guidelines and he agreed that this
usage is OK.  We will get that bit of the guidelines changed.

APPROVED

(In reply to comment #1)
> I had to reacquaint myself with the Ruby guidelines....
> 
> One question: This is also available as a gem.  If something ends up needing the
> gem, you'll have to abandon this package and submit rubygem-hpricot for review.
>  So it's worth asking: are you sure that nothing will want this as a gem, and if
> not then wouldn't it be easier to do it all at once?

Well, in general non-gem ruby module and gem ruby module are the same
in function. So I think no one would want gem hpricot if we provide
non-gem hpricot in rpm.

> 
> Regardless, I'll go ahead and review this; a gem package shouldn't be much
> different.
> 
> I note there's an hpricot-0.6 tarball on the upstream web site, but I don't know
> if you'd want to use it.
Thank you for information. I will check it later.

> 
> This package looks fine, save for one thing.  The guidelines spefically state
> that you need RuildRequires: ruby.  Currently ruby is only being brought in for
> this build because rake has a dependency on /usr/bin/ruby.  I honestly don't
> know if this is a real issue.

Yes, as rake needs /usr/bin/ruby, I removed the explicit BuildRequires.

(In reply to comment #2)
> Chatted with the primary author of the ruby guidelines and he agreed that this
> usage is OK.  We will get that bit of the guidelines changed.
> 
> APPROVED

Thank you for your review!

----------------------------------------------------------------------
New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name:       ruby-hpricot
Short Description:  A Fast, Enjoyable HTML Parser for Ruby
Owners:             mtasaka
Branches:           FC-6 F-7 F-8
InitialCC:          (nobody)
Cvsextras Commits:  yes

My understanding of gems is that it's possible for Ruby code to require the gem
in such a way that the non-gem package won't satisfy it.  But my understanding
of Ruby is rather weak.

In any case, CVS is done.

Well, rubygem-rake is not on FC-6, so I rebuilt
this package on devel, F-8 and F-7, with updated to 0.6.

Thank you for your review! Closing.