Spec URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth.spec SRPM URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth-2.2.0-1.fc14.src.rpm Description: BlueCloth is a complete rewrite using David Parsons Discount library, a C implementation of Markdown.
Revision -2: Spec URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth.spec SRPM URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth-2.2.0-2.fc14.src.rpm Changelog: - Fixed wrong binary location
Revision -3: Spec URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth.spec SRPM URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth-2.2.0-3.fc14.src.rpm Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3615839
Michal, could you please update the spec file for latest Fedora? Thank you.
Wow, this has been a loong time.. Going to update the spec file now.
Updated spec file: Spec URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth.spec SRPM URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth-2.2.0-3.fc19.src.rpm
I'll take this for a review.
* Remove BuildRoot - BuildRoot is not needed, unles you plan to ship this in EPE5 (but in that case, you miss a whole lot of stuff there ;) * Remove %clean section - Not needed anymore. * Use the library from %{buildroot}%{gem_instdir}/lib/ - I.e. you should replace: - mv %{buildroot}%{gem_instdir}/ext/bluecloth_ext.so \ %{buildroot}%{gem_extdir_mri}/ext/%{gem_name}/ + mv %{buildroot}%{gem_libdir}/bluecloth_ext.so \ %{buildroot}%{gem_extdir_mri}/ext/%{gem_name}/ * man pages - Do not compress man pages. That should be done automatically by build system - Refer them as "%doc %{_mandir}/man1/*" in %files section should be enough. * Directory ownership - %{gem_instdir} is not owned. Please uncomment the "%dir %{gem_instdir}" macro. * Mark documentation by %doc macro - Documentation should be marked by %doc macro. I am referring to the following files: %{gem_instdir}/LICENSE %{gem_instdir}/LICENSE.discount %{gem_instdir}/README.rdoc %{gem_instdir}/History.rdoc %{gem_instdir}/Manifest.txt %{gem_instdir}/bluecloth.1.pod * Do not BR: rubygem(hoe) - Not sure why are you requiring it. * Test suite - It is definitely not RSpec 1.x only. It runs quite OK with RSpec 2.x. There fails only several specs from spec/markdowntest_spec.rb, due to missing tidy-ext. Please omit just the failing tests. * License - Not sure about the licenses though. This is the licensecheck output: $ licensecheck LICENSE LICENSE: BSD (2 clause) $ licensecheck LICENSE.discount LICENSE.discount: MIT/X11 (BSD like) - However, the both looks more like BSD then MIT. Could you please check with Fedora Legal?
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #7) > * Remove BuildRoot > - BuildRoot is not needed, unles you plan to ship this in EPE5 (but in that > case, you miss a whole lot of stuff there ;) check. > > * Remove %clean section > - Not needed anymore. check. > > * Use the library from %{buildroot}%{gem_instdir}/lib/ > - I.e. you should replace: > > - mv %{buildroot}%{gem_instdir}/ext/bluecloth_ext.so \ > %{buildroot}%{gem_extdir_mri}/ext/%{gem_name}/ > + mv %{buildroot}%{gem_libdir}/bluecloth_ext.so \ > %{buildroot}%{gem_extdir_mri}/ext/%{gem_name}/ check. > > * man pages > - Do not compress man pages. That should be done automatically by build check. > system > - Refer them as "%doc %{_mandir}/man1/*" in %files section should be > enough. check. > > * Directory ownership > - %{gem_instdir} is not owned. Please uncomment the "%dir %{gem_instdir}" > macro. check. > > * Mark documentation by %doc macro > - Documentation should be marked by %doc macro. I am referring to the > following files: > > %{gem_instdir}/LICENSE > %{gem_instdir}/LICENSE.discount > %{gem_instdir}/README.rdoc > %{gem_instdir}/History.rdoc > %{gem_instdir}/Manifest.txt > %{gem_instdir}/bluecloth.1.pod check. > > * Do not BR: rubygem(hoe) > - Not sure why are you requiring it. check. > > * Test suite > - It is definitely not RSpec 1.x only. It runs quite OK with RSpec 2.x. > There fails only several specs from spec/markdowntest_spec.rb, due to > missing tidy-ext. Please omit just the failing tests. done. > > * License > - Not sure about the licenses though. This is the licensecheck output: > > $ licensecheck LICENSE > LICENSE: BSD (2 clause) > > $ licensecheck LICENSE.discount > LICENSE.discount: MIT/X11 (BSD like) The 'discount' license is for the 'discount' ruby gem which I guess this gem was bundling or something. However we are not bundling anything, so I think BSD is correct here. Thanks Vit for this review! Spec URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth.spec SRPM URL: http://omicron.mifo.sk/rubygem-bluecloth-2.2.0-4.fc19.src.rpm
(In reply to Michal Fojtik from comment #8) > > * License > > - Not sure about the licenses though. This is the licensecheck output: > > > > $ licensecheck LICENSE > > LICENSE: BSD (2 clause) > > > > $ licensecheck LICENSE.discount > > LICENSE.discount: MIT/X11 (BSD like) > > The 'discount' license is for the 'discount' ruby gem which I guess this gem > was bundling or something. However we are not bundling anything, so I think > BSD is correct here. Wrong and wrong. 1) There is discount library: http://www.pell.portland.or.us/~orc/Code/discount/ 2) It is actually bundling. I would consider it for personally, but others may disagree. Better to ask FPC as well as legal for the license. And since you mentioned rubygem-rdiscount and bundling: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=964940 I wonder, what is difference between libmarkdown and discount.
Ping ... Any progress?