Spec URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/rubygem-coderay.spec SRPM URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-1.fc11.src.rpm Description: CodeRay is a Ruby library for syntax highlighting. I try to make CodeRay easy to use and intuitive, but at the same time fully featured, complete, fast and efficient. $ rpmlint /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/RPMS/noarch/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-1.fc11.noarch.rpm /home/makerpm/rpmbuild/SRPMS/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-1.fc11.src.rpm SPECS/rubygem-coderay.spec 2 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. koji build: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=1432884
I will take this one. Instead I will appreciate it if you would review my review requests (bug 506168 or bug 507649, both are rubygem related)
For 0.8.312-1: * %define -> %global - We now recommend to use %global instead of %global: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Build_Architecture_and_File_Placement https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define * License - From lib/term/ansicolor.rb, the license tag should be "GPLv2" * Moving some document files - Would you explain why you want to move README or so from %geminstdir to %gemdir/doc ? Note that $ gem contents coderay expects that those (README or so) files are under %geminstdir. * %files - As you already defined %geminstdir, please use it also in %files instead of using %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ ! Summary ---------------------------------------------------------------- I try to make CodeRay easy to use and intuitive, .... ---------------------------------------------------------------- - It is ambiguous what "I" mean here...
(In reply to comment #2) > For 0.8.312-1: > > * %define -> %global > - We now recommend to use %global instead of %global: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Build_Architecture_and_File_Placement > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/global_preferred_over_define - Fixed > * License > - From lib/term/ansicolor.rb, the license tag should be > "GPLv2" > - lib/term/ansicolor.rb will be provided by package rubygem-term-ansicolor ( https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=504469 ). i have added ruby(term-ansicolor) into requires and during %install is directory lib/term removed. I give there LGPLv2 license as this license is specified on web of project and in LICENSE file > * Moving some document files > - Would you explain why you want to move README or so from %geminstdir > to %gemdir/doc ? > Note that $ gem contents coderay expects that those (README or so) files > are under %geminstdir. - - Fixed > * %files > - As you already defined %geminstdir, please use it also in %files > instead of using %{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ - Fixed > ! Summary > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > I try to make CodeRay easy to use and intuitive, .... > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > - It is ambiguous what "I" mean here... - Fixed Spec URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/rubygem-coderay.spec SRPM URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-2.fc11.src.rpm
Thanks for update. Now I will wait for bug 504469 to be updated.
For -2: * License - Now for this license the license tag should be "LGPLv2+". * Summary - Now Fedora thinks writing the package name (Coderay) in Summary is redundant. * Directory ownership issue - The directory %{geminstdir}/lib is not owned by this package.
(In reply to comment #5) > For -2: > > * License > - Now for this license the license tag should be "LGPLv2+". - Fixed > * Summary > - Now Fedora thinks writing the package name (Coderay) in > Summary is redundant. - Where is this written? I didn't see it in packaging guidelines. > * Directory ownership issue > - The directory %{geminstdir}/lib is not owned by this package. Spec URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/rubygem-coderay.spec SRPM URL: http://hpejakle.fedorapeople.org/packages/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc11.src.rpm
(In reply to comment #6) > > * Summary > > - Now Fedora thinks writing the package name (Coderay) in > > Summary is redundant. > - Where is this written? I didn't see it in packaging guidelines. See the (long) discussion beginning on http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-November/msg01484.html especially http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-November/msg01676.html and try: $ rpmlint -I name-repeated-in-summary
Yes, I read it, and I have tried (rpmlint from epel): $ rpmlint -I name-repeated-in-summary name-repeated-in-summary: Personally I don't think that this could be considered as blocker, I take it as recommendation Summary: Fast syntax highlighter engine for many programming languages Spec URL: http://www.brandforge.sk/hpejakle/packages/rubygem-coderay.spec
Okay. -------------------------------------------------------- This package (rubygem-coderay) is APPROVED by mtasaka --------------------------------------------------------
------- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-coderay Short Description: Fast syntax highlighter engine for many programming languages Owners: hpejakle Branches: F-10 F-11 F-12 InitialCC:
We cannot create F-12 branches yet; it is far too early in the release process for that. Otherwise, CVS done.
Please build this package on koji and submit push requests for F-10/11 on bodhi.
rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc10 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 10. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc10
rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc11 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 11. http://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc11
rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc11 has been pushed to the Fedora 11 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
rubygem-coderay-0.8.312-3.fc10 has been pushed to the Fedora 10 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.