Bug 507631 - Review Request: rubygem-rubyzip - Ruby module for reading and writing zip files
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubyzip - Ruby module for reading and writing zip files
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Mamoru TASAKA
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: FE-DEADREVIEW
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2009-06-23 14:48 UTC by Michael Stahnke
Modified: 2009-08-24 15:45 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2009-08-24 15:45:03 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Michael Stahnke 2009-06-23 14:48:25 UTC
Spec URL: http://stahnma.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-rubyzip.spec
SRPM URL: http://stahnma.fedorapeople.org/reviews/rubygem-rubyzip-0.9.1-1.fc10.src.rpm
Description:
rubyzip is a ruby module for reading and writing zip files

Comment 1 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-06-23 16:10:23 UTC
I will take this one. Instead I will appreciate it if you
would review either of my review requests (bug 506168 or bug 507649,
both are rubygem related)

Comment 2 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-06-23 17:58:44 UTC
Some notes for 0.9.1-1:

* %define -> %global
  - Now Fedora suggests to use %global instead of %define.
    ref:
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Pure_Ruby_packages
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define

* License
  - When it is written as "is distributed under the same license as ruby",
    the license tag should be "GPLv2 or Ruby".

* ruby(abi) Requires
  - All ruby related packages must have "Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8".
    And for consistency I always recommend to also add
    "BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8".
    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines

* %check
  - As this gem file contains test/ directory, please add %check
    stage and execute some tests.
    ( And for this case, I guess expanding gem file under %_builddir
      at %prep is preferred, ref:
      https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Gem_expand_stage_change
      also see:
      http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-mocha/rubygem-mocha.spec
    )

* %files
  - As you already defined %geminstdir, please use it also on %files
  - %defattr must be set before writing %doc entry.
  - The directory %geminstdir itself is not owned by this package.

Comment 3 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-07-01 14:22:32 UTC
ping?

Comment 4 Michael Stahnke 2009-07-02 03:28:58 UTC
hi.  I started re-working the spec file to include your recommendations.  %check will be the hardest part.  I will finish tomorrow (US).

Comment 5 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-07-15 18:15:37 UTC
ping again?

Comment 6 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-07-23 16:01:51 UTC
ping again?

Comment 7 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-08-04 17:09:59 UTC
Again ping?

Comment 8 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-08-14 15:38:16 UTC
I will close this bug as NOTABUG if no response from the reporter
is received within ONE WEEK.

Comment 9 Mamoru TASAKA 2009-08-24 15:45:03 UTC
Closing.

If someone want to import this package into Fedora, please
file a new review request and mark this bug as a duplicate
of the new one.

Thank you!


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