Bug 722364

Summary:	Review Request: rubygem-xmlparser - Ruby bindings for Expat
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Shawn Starr <shawn.starr>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	notting, package-review, ulrich.schwickerath
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2011-07-17 17:57:22 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:

Description Shawn Starr 2011-07-15 02:18:48 UTC

Spec URL: http://www.sh0n.net/spstarr/fedora/rubygem-xmlparser/rubygem-xmlparser.spec
SRPM URL:
http://www.sh0n.net/spstarr/fedora/rubygem-extlib/rubygem-xmlparser-0.6.81-1.fc16.src.rpm
Description: Ruby bindings for Expat

Comments/review is certainly requested, this .gem from rubygems.org is badly built (missing files in the .gem itself but installs) but this is all we get unless we roll our own .gem.

Also note, the original author now has 0.7.2 but there is no .gem created and no other distros are packaging 0.7.2 (or know about it?)

This can be found here: http://www.yoshidam.net/Ruby.html

This package is needed for upcoming OpenNebula 3.0 support.

Comment 1 Shawn Starr 2011-07-15 02:25:16 UTC

In addition, the .gem does not provide Encoding support and if we do want this, we need 0.7.2.

I do not know of Fedora's policy for packaging non-gem .gem packages vs .gem packages. We could roll our own .gem of 0.7.2. but I don't know the policy of this.

Comment 2 Ulrich Schwickerath 2011-07-15 06:06:54 UTC

Shawn,

are you aware of this request ?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=719854

Same context. This gem is actually needed for ONE 2.2 already. If it's not there the performance is really bad. 

I wonder if this new bug is a duplicate.

Comment 3 Shawn Starr 2011-07-15 15:23:37 UTC

Its needed for OpenNebula 3.0 (not released yet), I am working with upstream, although it's interesting someone else is trying to package this :)

i don't care who wants to own it, we need it as a dependency however 2.2 and 3.0.

Comment 4 Shawn Starr 2011-07-15 15:27:52 UTC

<jmelis> first beta is scheduled for beginning of next week
<jmelis> after that will come a beta2
<jmelis> and a release candidate
<jmelis> OpenNebula 3.0 final is scheduled for end of august

Comment 5 Shawn Starr 2011-07-17 17:57:22 UTC

Close it, will focus on other dependencies needed to get OpenNebula 3.0 into Fedora.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 719854 ***