SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.4.1-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: Within this gem, you get one thing - newgem - an executable to create your own gems. Your new gems will include designated folders for Ruby code, test files, executables, and even a default website page for you to explain your project, and which instantly uploads to RubyForge website (which looks just like this one by default)
rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/app_generators/newgem/templates/script/console.erb 0644 rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/rubygems_generators/executable/templates/bin/app.rb.erb 0644 rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/newgem_generators/install_website/templates/script/txt2html 0644 Template of a script -- has a shebang but should not be executable. rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/website/version.js rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/app_generators/newgem_simple/templates/lib/templates.rb rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.4.1/website/version.txt I can't see how these could cause problem and prefer not to deviate from upstream, but will get rid of them if reviewer wishes so.
Attempted to incorporate comments from here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504469#c1 SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.4.1-2.fc11.src.rpm
SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.4.1-3.fc11.src.rpm
Lubomir, could you please package latest version (1.5.1) if it is possible?
Hi, I'm working on ruby packages that could benefit from this, willing to help.
Any progress?
SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.5.2-1.fc11.src.rpm Matthew: Feel free to help. I'd be glad and thankful if you could (co-)maintain this once it's in.
1] rpmlint complaining rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.4.1-3 ['1.5.2-1.fc12', '1.5.2-1'] rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/executable/templates/bin/app.rb.erb 0644 /usr/bin/env rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/fixtures/home/.rubyforge rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/fixtures/home/.rubyforge rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/website/version.js rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_theme_generators/plain_theme/USAGE rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/app_generators/newgem_simple/templates/lib/templates.rb rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/test_helper.rb rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_theme_generators/long_box_theme/USAGE rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/app_generators/newgem/templates/script/console.erb 0644 /usr/bin/env rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/executable/USAGE rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_generators/install_website/templates/script/txt2html 0644 /usr/bin/env 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 4 warnings. *license ok *naming ok *spec file legible *build ok please fix rpmlint messages SPEC file here and in src.rpm seems different
Lubomir or Matthew, ping?
(I have not tried to check this gem by myself, however please be careful when attempting to delete hidden files or zero-size files. I have already seen some cases (including gem based rpms) in which deleting such files made the package non-workable. Also it is recommended to execute $ rake test in %check as this gem file contains test/ directory)
(In reply to comment #7) > SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec > SRPM: > http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.5.2-1.fc11.src.rpm > > Matthew: Feel free to help. I'd be glad and thankful if you could (co-)maintain > this once it's in. Sure thing. I'm now requiring this for another package I'm working on so I'll post my update. I tried to record my modifications in the changelog. Hopefully they all make sense. Only other improvement I'd like to make is to break the ri/rdoc content, tests and Rakefile into a separate -doc package giving the main one a smaller footprint. Any issue with that? (In reply to comment #8) > 1] rpmlint complaining > rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.4.1-3 > ['1.5.2-1.fc12', '1.5.2-1'] > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/executable/templates/bin/app.rb.erb > 0644 /usr/bin/env > rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/fixtures/home/.rubyforge > rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/fixtures/home/.rubyforge > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/website/version.js > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_theme_generators/plain_theme/USAGE > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/app_generators/newgem_simple/templates/lib/templates.rb > rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/test_helper.rb > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_theme_generators/long_box_theme/USAGE > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/app_generators/newgem/templates/script/console.erb > 0644 /usr/bin/env > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/executable/USAGE > rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script > /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_generators/install_website/templates/script/txt2html > 0644 /usr/bin/env > 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 8 errors, 4 warnings. > > *license ok > *naming ok > *spec file legible > *build ok > > please fix rpmlint messages I've fixed the one regarding the crlf issue but the others are harder to quash as they are all templates/placeholder files used by newgem to create new projects. Is there a nicer way to have rpmlint ignore these? For now I've added a note in the spec file. > SPEC file here and in src.rpm seems different
Spec URL: http://magoazul.com/wip/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM URL: http://magoazul.com/wip/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.5.2-2.fc13.src.rpm * Fri Jan 01 2010 Matthew Kent <mkent> - 1.5.2-2 - Drop versioning on requirements as this is a new package. - Drop unused ruby_sitelib macro. - Add a rubyabi macro. - RPM_BUILD_ROOT -> buildroot - use one style of macros. - Fix bin/env ruby searching in bin/newgem. - Remove duplicate hoe dependency. - Add check phase. - Fix another crlf (#504476). - Add note about rpmlint complaints (#504476). mkent@fedora-devel-chef:~/rpmbuild/SPECS$ rpmlint rubygem-newgem.spec /var/tmp/old_results/rubygem-newgem-1.5.2-2.fc13.* rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/executable/templates/bin/app.rb.erb 0644 /usr/bin/env rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/fixtures/home/.rubyforge rubygem-newgem.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/test/fixtures/home/.rubyforge rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/website/version.js rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_theme_generators/plain_theme/USAGE rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/app_generators/newgem_simple/templates/lib/templates.rb rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_theme_generators/long_box_theme/USAGE rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/app_generators/newgem/templates/script/console.erb 0644 /usr/bin/env rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: zero-length /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/rubygems_generators/executable/USAGE rubygem-newgem.noarch: E: non-executable-script /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/newgem-1.5.2/newgem_generators/install_website/templates/script/txt2html 0644 /usr/bin/env
Jan, ping?
My comments (to mkent's 1.5.2-2) * License ------------------------------------------------------------- Overall: MIT LGPLv2+: ./newgem_theme_generators/long_box_theme/templates/website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js ./newgem_theme_generators/plain_theme/templates/website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js ./website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js ------------------------------------------------------------- - The license tag should be "MIT and LGPLv2+". * Requires - Currently I cannot figure out why "R: rubygem(activesupport)" is needed. Also, I cannot figure out why "['activesupport','>= 2.0.2']," is in Rakefile. - Would you check if the following dependencies are optional or rather mandatory? ------------------------------------------------------------- ./lib/newgem/rubyforge-ext.rb: require 'rubyforge' -------------------------------------------------------------
Would like to get this through to unblock bug 551817. (In reply to comment #14) > My comments (to mkent's 1.5.2-2) > > * License > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Overall: MIT > > LGPLv2+: > ./newgem_theme_generators/long_box_theme/templates/website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js > ./newgem_theme_generators/plain_theme/templates/website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js > ./website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js > ------------------------------------------------------------- > - The license tag should be "MIT and LGPLv2+". > Nice catch, fixed. > * Requires > - Currently I cannot figure out why "R: rubygem(activesupport)" is needed. > Also, I cannot figure out why "['activesupport','>= 2.0.2']," is in > Rakefile. > I'm not sure either, especially as rubigen already requires activesupport. Maybe the developer covering up for a broken dependency in rubigen? I'll comment it out and open an issue with the developer. > - Would you check if the following dependencies are optional or > rather mandatory? > ------------------------------------------------------------- > ./lib/newgem/rubyforge-ext.rb: require 'rubyforge' > ------------------------------------------------------------- Looks pretty mandatory to me and is currently pulled in by the hoe dependency. Having trouble recalling the best practice for this and can't spot it in the guidelines - should I be explicitly listing rubyforge as a dependency?
Spec URL: http://magoazul.com/wip/SPECS/rubygem-newgem.spec SRPM URL: http://magoazul.com/wip/SRPMS/rubygem-newgem-1.5.2-3.fc13.src.rpm * Mon Feb 01 2010 Matthew Kent <mkent> - 1.5.3-3 - Fix License (#504476). - Disable activesupport Requires for now (#504476).
Mamoru, Are you interested in finishing of this review? This week I would not have enough time :/
@Jan: Thank you for replying. Since currently this review request blocks some other requests, I will take over this review. (In reply to comment #15) > > - Would you check if the following dependencies are optional or > > rather mandatory? > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > ./lib/newgem/rubyforge-ext.rb: require 'rubyforge' > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Looks pretty mandatory to me and is currently pulled in by the hoe dependency. > Having trouble recalling the best practice for this and can't spot it in the > guidelines - should I be explicitly listing rubyforge as a dependency? - Thank you for the catch. For this I will leave to how you think. ----------------------------------------------------------------- This package (rubygem-newgem) is APPROVED by mtasaka -----------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks you Mamoru and Matthew for finishing this up! I'm not sure if I'm expected to file a CVS request now or if Matthew should, and if he's willing to maintain the package. (I'd be glad and thankful if he maintained this, though).
(In reply to comment #19) > Thanks you Mamoru and Matthew for finishing this up! > No problem! :) > I'm not sure if I'm expected to file a CVS request now or if Matthew should, > and if he's willing to maintain the package. (I'd be glad and thankful if he > maintained this, though). I'll file it, let me know if you want to co-maintain in the future.
New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-newgem Short Description: Bundle Ruby libraries into a RubyGem Owners: mkent Branches: F-11 F-12 InitialCC:
CVS done
Closing this...
Ugh, closed the wrong bug id in submitting the update.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-newgem Short Description: Bundle Ruby libraries into a RubyGem Owners: stahnma Branches: EL5 EL6 InitialCC: mkent
Package Change Request ====================== Package Name: rubygem-newgem New Branches: el5 el6 Owners: stahnma
Git done (by process-git-requests).