+1 for not confusing users with libraries that do not work as expected.
Jun Aruga wrote on 5/9/19 1:17 PM: > I agree the intent to create fake libraries for SimpleCov, Coveralls > and Bundler. > It makes each rubygem package easy and clean. That's good. > > But ruby-devel is used for the use case to build the rubygem that has > a C extension, with ruby.h > I think that ruby-devel's "devel" means user's development, not > packager's development > If we add the fake libraries, users are confused to refer the fake libraries. > > I assume that the fake libraries are used for the use case of our rpm > packaging development only. > > I would prefer to create new ruby's sub RPM package or separated RPM > package such as > * "ruby-packagers-utils": inspired from scl-utils > or > * "ruby-packagers-devel" > or > * "ruby-packagers-fake-libs" > or etc > > Then each rubygem-foo.spec use like this if it is necessary. > > rubygem-foo.spec > > ``` > BuildRequires: ruby-packagers-utils > ``` > > _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected]
