https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040453
Björn "besser82" Esser <bjoern.es...@gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|ASSIGNED |POST
Flags| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #9 from Björn "besser82" Esser <bjoern.es...@gmail.com> ---
Updated package:
%changelog
* Thu Dec 12 2013 Björn Esser <bjoern.es...@gmail.com> - 0.1.2-3
- improvements as recommended in review by Vít Ondruch (vondruch)
from comments #7 and #8 (#1040453)
* Wed Dec 11 2013 Björn Esser <bjoern.es...@gmail.com> - 0.1.2-2
- improvements as recommended in review by Vít Ondruch (vondruch)
from comments #2 and #3 (#1040453)
* Sun Dec 08 2013 Björn Esser <bjoern.es...@gmail.com> - 0.1.2-1
- Initial rpm release (#1040453)
Urls:
Spec URL: http://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/rubygem-rspec-longrun.spec
SRPM URL:
http://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/rubygem-rspec-longrun-0.1.2-3.fc20.src.rpm
Koji Builds for updated package:
el5: no build ---> missing dependencies
el6: no build ---> missing dependencies
F18: no build ---> missing dependencies, will be soon EOL
F19: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6283070
F20: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6283074
Frh: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6283076
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #7)
> That is one possibility, the easier one is:
>
> rspec spec
>
> The example is actually in guidelines ;) I also suggest to run the test
> suite on "build" gem, not the "expanded", i.e. surroudn the execution by
> "pushd .%{gem_instdir} ... popd"
Changed the %check-target accordingly. Thanks for your proposal.
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #8)
> And I have a few remarks:
>
> * %{gem_cache}
> - For simplification, I would drop it on every OS. It is lightly mentioned
> just in old guidelines, which are currently aimed on EPEL5, but it makes
> (almost) no difference if the cache is kept or not.
dropped on every OS.
> * Shebang change
> - Although there is no difference in functionality, we are typically doing
> such changes in %install section.
Thats a matter of preference, isn't it? On most every other language's package
I've seen so far this is done during %prep. So I'll keep it this way.
> The above remarks are just minor nits and otherwise the package looks sane
> => APPROVED.
Many thanks for the review, Vít!
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: rubygem-rspec-longrun
Short Description: RSpec formatter for long-running specs
Owners: besser82
Branches: el5 el6 f18 f19 f20
InitialCC:
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
