Bug 1221567 - Review Request: rubygem-molinillo - Provides support for dependency resolution
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-molinillo - Provides support for dependency resolution
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard: NotReady
Depends On:
Blocks: 1172650
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-05-14 11:38 UTC by Josef Stribny
Modified: 2016-10-11 12:08 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-10-11 12:08:10 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Josef Stribny 2015-05-14 11:38:37 UTC
Spec URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/rubygem-molinillo.spec
SRPM URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/rubygem-molinillo-0.2.3-1.fc23.src.rpm
Description: Molinillo is a generic dependency resolution implementation in Ruby.
Fedora Account System Username: jstribny

Comment 1 Alec Leamas 2015-05-21 10:09:30 UTC
I have pushed two feature branches ruby21 (for f21) and ruby22 (f22). At a glance, this solves this problem. 

In this branch, the ruby plugin is also a separate package, although still within the same srpm. A small step.

I need help from ruby-knowledged people to review and test this branch (anyone, they are identical from s ruby perspective).

Comment 2 Alec Leamas 2015-05-21 10:27:51 UTC
WTF?! Right comment in wrong bug. Please ignore.

Comment 3 František Dvořák 2015-08-04 14:31:01 UTC
Would you be interested in review swap with rubygem-aws-sdk-resources?:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1249748


Review comments for rubygem-molinillo:

1) new version released in the meantime

2) /usr/bin/env dependency in -doc subpackage (just a hint, maybe it's OK)

Possible solution is 'chmod -x' on spec/resolver_integration_specs/index_from_rubygems.rb .

3) ruby(release) and ruby are probably not needed? (just a hint, maybe it's OK or needed)

Comment 4 Vít Ondruch 2015-08-19 11:18:00 UTC
Sorry Františku,

But I am not sure this package has independent future in Fedora, since I have asked for bundling exception for this package [1].


[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/560

Comment 5 František Dvořák 2015-08-20 07:46:34 UTC
No problem.

So even bundling is bundled in the bundler. :-)

Comment 7 Vít Ondruch 2016-10-11 12:08:10 UTC
There is no use for independent Molinillo package. We are bundling it in Bundler ATM and there is no way around it unfortunately :/


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.