https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1051901
--- Comment #3 from Sam Kottler <skott...@redhat.com> ---
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #2)
> * %clean may not be required
> - %clean is required just for EPEL5 [1], are you planning to submit this
> package for EPEL5? Make this section optional just for EPEL5 might be
> good
> idea as well. Not a blocker though.
Nope, definitely not going to put the package in EL5. Removed.
>
> * License file in main package
> - The license file have to be shipped in the main package [2].
Moved it.
>
> * Wrong conditionalized ruby requires
> - "%if 0%{?rhel} <= 6" is on Fedora always true, since %{rhel} macro is not
> defined. This results in "Error: No Package found for ruby(abi) = 1.8"
> during build.
I removed the conditional completely - when I pull the package into EPEL6 I'll
just change the package names.
>
> * BuildRequires: ruby
> - There is no need for "BuildRequires: ruby" as long as the gem is noarch.
> "BuildRequires: ruby(release)" should be enough.
Removed.
>
> * Move test and Rakefile into -doc subpackage
> - Files which are not needed for runtime are typically placed into -doc
> subpackage.
Moved them into the -doc subpackage.
>
>
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#.25clean
> [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
--
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
