Bug 532309

- The srpm name must be "rubygem-ruby-net-ldap", not "rubygem-net-ldap"
  ( even if the name seems rather redundant ), because
  * the installed gem name is actually "ruby-net-ldap", not "net-ldap"
    ( actually "gem list -b foo" or ruby -e "require 'rubygems' ; gem 'foo'"
      shows it ).
    Removing ruby- part from srpm is more confusing.

- Please use the defined macro and remove unused macro definition.

- Usually gems' source URL are:
  http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/<gemname>-<version>.gem

- Mark document files as %doc properly

- Please enable test program.

ping?

(In reply to comment #1)
> - The srpm name must be "rubygem-ruby-net-ldap", not "rubygem-net-ldap"
>   ( even if the name seems rather redundant ), because
>   * the installed gem name is actually "ruby-net-ldap", not "net-ldap"
>     ( actually "gem list -b foo" or ruby -e "require 'rubygems' ; gem 'foo'"
>       shows it ).
>     Removing ruby- part from srpm is more confusing.
> 

Fixed.

> - Please use the defined macro and remove unused macro definition.
> 

Fixed.

> - Usually gems' source URL are:
>   http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/<gemname>-<version>.gem
> 

Fixed.

> - Mark document files as %doc properly
> 
> - Please enable test program.  

These tests will mostly fail because;

1) there isn't any adequate testing
2) tests do not have an LDAP server to connect to

I enabled them anyway and made sure they would hold back the rpm build

New SPEC: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/SPECS/rubygem-ruby-net-ldap.spec
New SRPM: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/f12/SRPMS/rubygem-ruby-net-ldap-0.0.4-2.fc12.src.rpm

For 0.0.4-2:

* License
  - As far as I checked the whole source codes, the license
    tag should be "GPLv2+".

* Obsoletes
  - I don't think "Obsoletes: rubygem-net-ldap <= %{version}"
    is needed because rubygem-net-ldap is not imported into Fedora
    yet.

(In reply to comment #4)
> For 0.0.4-2:
> 
> * License
>   - As far as I checked the whole source codes, the license
>     tag should be "GPLv2+".
> 

Fixed.

> * Obsoletes
>   - I don't think "Obsoletes: rubygem-net-ldap <= %{version}"
>     is needed because rubygem-net-ldap is not imported into Fedora
>     yet.  

It has been deployed in production already -also the reason why I'm submitting the package-; it must have the Obsoletes at least for the first build/release.

New SPEC: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/SPECS/rubygem-ruby-net-ldap.spec
New SRPM: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/f13/SRPMS/rubygem-ruby-net-ldap-0.0.4-3.fc13.src.rpm

(In reply to comment #5)
> > * Obsoletes
> >   - I don't think "Obsoletes: rubygem-net-ldap <= %{version}"
> >     is needed because rubygem-net-ldap is not imported into Fedora
> >     yet.  
> 
> It has been deployed in production already -also the reason why I'm submitting
> the package-; 

What do you mean here? I googled rubygem-net-ldap and it seems
that only Suse uses it, and I don't think we should take care of 
Suse's naming way.

(In reply to comment #6)
> (In reply to comment #5)
> > > * Obsoletes
> > >   - I don't think "Obsoletes: rubygem-net-ldap <= %{version}"
> > >     is needed because rubygem-net-ldap is not imported into Fedora
> > >     yet.  
> > 
> > It has been deployed in production already -also the reason why I'm submitting
> > the package-; 
> 
> What do you mean here? I googled rubygem-net-ldap and it seems
> that only Suse uses it, and I don't think we should take care of 
> Suse's naming way.  

https://terminal.ogd.nl - it's in production in a private environment

(In reply to comment #7)
> https://terminal.ogd.nl - it's in production in a private environment  
... What is this? (it seems to be asking me to enter some password
    in the language I cannot understand), and I doubt Fedora should
    take care of this project(?) (it is almost impossible for Fedora
    to take care of every such private project).

Look, this is my company's project and my company is (partly) taking care of pushing the project's dependencies into Fedora.

It doesn't really matter whether we have an extra Obsoletes just for the first real release of this package through Fedora now does it?

So please write in the spec file what is really related to Fedora.
In your logic you can add arbitrary Obsoletes because "it is used
by my project", however no other person knows it and it is just unneeded.

(In reply to comment #10)
> So please write in the spec file what is really related to Fedora.
> In your logic you can add arbitrary Obsoletes because "it is used
> by my project", however no other person knows it and it is just unneeded.  

That's not my logic, nor the scope of this package, and it is needed since the package was renamed, and *may* have been deployed throughout more then one environment already -we know of at least one situation where it is.

(In reply to comment #11)
> and it is needed since the
> package was renamed

If what you mean here is "since the review request is opened", I have already
seen many cases where packages are renamed during review process.

Well, I am not going to approve this package unless you remove
such Obsoletes which is completely unneeded on Fedora. If you still
want to persist, please post your opinion to fedora-packaging-list.

ping? (By the way Jason's opinition is just as same as me)

New SPEC: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/SPECS/rubygem-ruby-net-ldap.spec
New SRPM: http://www.kanarip.com/custom/f12/SRPMS/rubygem-ruby-net-ldap-0.0.4-4.fc12.src.rpm

Okay.

----------------------------------------------------------------
   This package (rubygem-ruby-net-ldap) is APPROVED by mtasaka
----------------------------------------------------------------

New Package CVS Request
=======================
Package Name: rubygem-ruby-net-ldap
Short Description: A full-featured pure-Ruby LDAP client
Owners: kanarip
Branches: EL-5 F-11 F-12
InitialCC:

cvs done.

Closing.