Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 866982
Review Request: rubygem-gem-patch - RubyGems plugin for patching gems.
Last modified: 2016-01-04 00:50:39 EST
Spec URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/rubygem-gem-patch.spec
SRPM URL: rubygem-gem-patch-0.1.2-1.fc17.src.rpm
Description: `gem-patch` is a RubyGems plugin that helps to patch gems without manually opening and rebuilding them. It opens a given .gem file, extracts it, patches it with system `patch` command, clones its spec, updates the file list and builds the patched gem.
Fedora Account System Username: jstribny
This is my first package for Fedora, so I need a sponsor. I am also the upstream maintainer.
SRPM full URL:
I'll take this package for a review and I can sponsor you later as well. Please follow the procedures at  as well as .
First of all, it seems you created the .spec file by hand. While that is perfectly fine, gem2rpm could save you some work.
* Source URL
- You did not provided full source URL. Your URL should be:
* %description 80 chars wrap
- In %description, there should be no lines longer than 80 characters .
* Missing %changelog
- Please add %changelog section into your .spec file .
* -doc subpackage
- Please consider to move documentation into -doc subpackage .
I packed it using gem2rpm and fixed the mentioned issues on the way.
Resulting spec file and SRPM are located on the same URLs as before [1, 2].
I am also including a link to koji results  for `koji build --scratch f19`.
* Update release number between release
- You should bump the release number between each iteration of review.
It helps to keep track of changes. You keep a record of changes in
changelog as well.
* Description wrapping
- Isn't it strangely wrapped? Hint: single word on line.
* Keep tests in -doc subpackage
- We do not through out the test suite if it is part of the package. However,
if there is -doc subpackage, the test suite should be moved there.
See "MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage.
(The definition of large is left up to the packager's best judgement, but
is not restricted to size. Large can refer to either size or quantity)."
* Keep the license in main package
- See "MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc." in .
* Move rakefile.rb into -doc subpackage
- Since this file is not required for runtime, I suggest to move it into -doc
I fixed the issues you listed and also upgraded to gem-patch-0.1.3:
The .spec you link here differs from spec in your SRPM. Which one is correct? Could you please fix this issue? Thank you.
I uploaded the corresponding SRPM, it wasn't up-to-date. Apologies.
* pushd paired with popd
- This is minor nit and has no influence on anything, but these are pair
commands and they should be used in pair IMO (see %check section).
BTW Upstream question: What is the purpose of two identical READMEs?
Otherwise the package looks good => APPROVED.
Since you proven that you understand the guidelines by passing two packages through review and poking around for some informal reviews, I am going to sponsor you as well. Enjoy your new privileges for good of community ;)
You can follow now with:
New Package SCM Request
Package Name: rubygem-gem-patch
Short Description: RubyGems plugin for patching gems
Branches: f17 f18
Git done (by process-git-requests).
rubygem-gem-patch-0.1.3-1.fc18 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 18.
rubygem-gem-patch-0.1.3-1.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17.
rubygem-gem-patch-0.1.3-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 testing repository.
rubygem-gem-patch-0.1.3-1.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository.
rubygem-gem-patch-0.1.3-1.fc18 has been pushed to the Fedora 18 stable repository.