Bug 637939 - Review Request: rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2 - Ruby binding of GdkPixbuf-2.x
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2 - Ruby binding of GdkPixbuf-2.x
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Michal Fojtik
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 635302 637448
Blocks: 639098 639636 639638
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-09-27 19:39 UTC by Mamoru TASAKA
Modified: 2010-11-08 17:40 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-11-08 17:40:46 UTC
mfojtik: fedora-review+
tibbs: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Mamoru TASAKA 2010-09-27 19:39:37 UTC
Spec URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2.spec
SRPM URL: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2-0.90.2-2.fc.src.rpm
Description: 
Ruby/GdkPixbuf2 is a Ruby binding of GdkPixbuf-2.x.

Depending on bug 635302 and bug 637448, so currently no scratch build
on koji is available.
Build log for F-14 is available on:
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2/MOCK-rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2.log

Comment 2 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-10-23 17:00:22 UTC
ping?

(Note: 0.90.3 is released, however for now please review
 this 0.90.2 version)

Comment 4 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-10-31 18:51:18 UTC
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2.spec
http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2/rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2-0.90.5-2.fc.src.rpm

* Sun Oct 31 2010 Mamoru Taska  <mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp> - 0.90.5-2
- 0.90.5
- Move C extension so that "require %%gemname" works correctly

Comment 5 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-11-01 18:22:23 UTC
Michal, would you review this? This bug currently blocks all other
ruby-gnome2 related packages.

Comment 6 Michal Fojtik 2010-11-04 10:10:09 UTC
I'm really sorry for the delay, as usually, this package looks perfectly sane for me:

* Packages that contain Ruby Gems must be called rubygem-%{gemname} where gemname is the name from the Gem's specification.

[OK]

* The Source of the package must be the full URL to the released Gem archive; th version of the package must be the Gem's version

[!] Please correct URL to: http://rubygems.org/downloads/%{gemname}-%{version}.gem

The package must have a Requires and a BuildRequires on rubygems

[OK]

For every dependency on a Gem named gemdep, the package must contain a Requires on rubygem(%{gemdep}) with the same version constraints as the Gem

[OK]

The %prep and %build sections of the specfile should be empty.

[OK] -> They are not empty, but it's OK for binary extensions

The Gem must be installed into %{gemdir} defined as
%global gemdir %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir' 2>/dev/null)

[OK]

Architecture-specific content must not be installed into %{gemdir}

[OK]

If the Gem contains binary content (e.g., for a database driver), it must be marked as architecture specific, and all architecture specific content must be moved from the %{gemdir} to the [#ruby_sitearch %{ruby_sitearch} directory] during %install

[OK]

Other things looks good as well. REVIEW+

(Please correct that URL before importing this gem into git)

Comment 7 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-11-04 10:23:23 UTC
Thank you!
Would you change fedora-review flag instead of fedora-cvs flag?
(I can do it, however I guess I should not do it)

Comment 8 Michal Fojtik 2010-11-04 12:00:54 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> Thank you!
> Would you change fedora-review flag instead of fedora-cvs flag?
> (I can do it, however I guess I should not do it)

Oh crap, sorry for that. Just too much work nowadays ;-)

Comment 9 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-11-04 20:37:41 UTC
Thank you again!

New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name:       rubygem-gdk_pixbuf2
Short Description:  Ruby binding of GdkPixbuf-2.x
Owners:             mtasaka
Branches:           f13 f14

Comment 10 Jason Tibbitts 2010-11-05 17:22:37 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).

Comment 11 Mamoru TASAKA 2010-11-08 17:40:46 UTC
Closing.

Thank you for reviewing and SCM procedure.


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