Bug 719908
| Summary: | Review Request: rubygem-multi_json - A gem to provide swappable JSON backends | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Vít Ondruch <vondruch> |
| Component: | Package Review | Assignee: | Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda <bkabrda> |
| Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | rawhide | CC: | bkabrda, fotios, mastahnke, notting, package-review |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Flags: | bkabrda:
fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+ |
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2011-11-14 16:21:45 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: | 738744 | ||
|
Description
Vít Ondruch
2011-07-08 11:25:25 UTC
*** Bug 738721 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** I'm taking this one. - I'm not sure whether marking %{geminstdir}/Rakefile as %doc is appropriate. In my opinion, Rakefile is not documentation (although it is not needed for runtime and should stay in the documentation subpackage).
- Okjson (the fallback json engine for multi_json) seems to be bundled from https://github.com/kr/okjson, but the author of okjson says that his library is meant for vendoring. I think that unbundling okjson wouldn't make much sense in this case (therefore I don't suggest any change to your specfile, I just think it's worth mentioning here) - what is your opinion on this matter? I'd like to make this clear before I approve your package.
(In reply to comment #3) > - I'm not sure whether marking %{geminstdir}/Rakefile as %doc is appropriate. > In my opinion, Rakefile is not documentation (although it is not needed for > runtime and should stay in the documentation subpackage). You are right. Fixed. > - Okjson (the fallback json engine for multi_json) seems to be bundled from > https://github.com/kr/okjson, but the author of okjson says that his library is > meant for vendoring. I think that unbundling okjson wouldn't make much sense in > this case (therefore I don't suggest any change to your specfile, I just think > it's worth mentioning here) - what is your opinion on this matter? I'd like to > make this clear before I approve your package. Sorry, I did not noticed :( This is my opinion: https://github.com/kr/okjson/issues/2 https://github.com/intridea/multi_json/issues/30 Unfortunately authors of both, multi_json and OkJson are pretty happy with the state of matter, therefore I am asking FPC for exception for OkJson as a copy lib [1]. Lets see what will follow ... [1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/113 Great, the OkJson was granted exception for bundling. So here are the latest packages, which reflect your comments: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-multi_json.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-multi_json-1.0.3-2.fcf17.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3507536 Everything looks fine now, package is APPROVED. New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-multi_json Short Description: A gem to provide swappable JSON backends Owners: vondruch Branches: InitialCC: Git done (by process-git-requests). Did this make it into F16? (In reply to comment #10) > Did this make it into F16? No. I am not pushing new packages into older releases without reasons. Do you like it in F16? |