Bug 529799

Summary:	Review Request: rubygem-abstract - Allows you to define an abstract method in Ruby
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Matthew Kent <mkent>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	fedora-package-review, mastahnke, notting
Target Milestone:	---	Flags:	mtasaka: fedora-review+ kevin: fedora-cvs+
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	1.0.0-2.fc11	Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2009-10-29 02:56:07 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	530275

Description Matthew Kent 2009-10-20 05:57:20 UTC

Spec URL: http://magoazul.com/wip/SPECS/rubygem-abstract.spec
SRPM URL: http://magoazul.com/wip/SRPMS/rubygem-abstract-1.0.0-1.fc12.src.rpm
Description: Small library that allows you to define an abstract method in Ruby.

mkent@fedora-devel-chef:~/rpmbuild/SPECS$ rpmlint rubygem-abstract.spec /var/tmp/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rubygem-abstract-1.0.0-1.magoazul.src.rpm
1 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

Tiny rpm for sure, but a dependency of rubygem-erubis which coming shortly.

Comment 1 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-10-24 07:46:58 UTC

Well,
* License
  - When the software says "The license is the same as Ruby", on
    Fedora the license tag should be "GPLv2 or Ruby" (not "GPLv2+ or")

Other things are okay
--------------------------------------------------------------
    This package (rubygem-abstract) is APPROVED by mtasaka
--------------------------------------------------------------

Comment 2 Matthew Kent 2009-10-25 05:13:33 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> Well,
> * License
>   - When the software says "The license is the same as Ruby", on
>     Fedora the license tag should be "GPLv2 or Ruby" (not "GPLv2+ or")

Noted, will fix.

> 
> Other things are okay
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>     This package (rubygem-abstract) is APPROVED by mtasaka
> --------------------------------------------------------------  

Thanks for the review.

Comment 3 Matthew Kent 2009-10-25 05:13:54 UTC

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: rubygem-abstract
Short Description: Allows you to define an abstract method in Ruby
Owners: mkent
Branches: F-11 F-12
InitialCC:

Comment 4 Kevin Fenzi 2009-10-26 20:08:22 UTC

cvs done.

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2009-10-28 04:50:39 UTC

rubygem-abstract-1.0.0-2.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11.
http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-abstract-1.0.0-2.fc11

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2009-10-29 02:55:58 UTC

rubygem-abstract-1.0.0-2.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository.  If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 7 Michael Stahnke 2010-09-10 20:07:04 UTC

Package Change Request
======================
Package Name: rubygem-abstract
New Branches: el5 el6
Owners: stahnma

Comment 8 Michael Stahnke 2010-09-10 20:07:33 UTC

mkent is aware of change.

Comment 9 Kevin Fenzi 2010-09-11 19:44:11 UTC

Git done (by process-git-requests).