Dne 13. 11. 20 v 17:46 Christopher Brown napsal(a):
Hi folks,

I've got a working build of asciidoctor-diagram ready for review:

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897619 <https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1897619>

Spec file:

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/snecklifter/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/master/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram.spec <https://raw.githubusercontent.com/snecklifter/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram/master/rubygem-asciidoctor-diagram.spec>

@Dan - this includes support for graphviz, plantuml, and blockdiag you mentioned plus a few others that are already packaged.

Appreciate any eyes on this, particularly with regards to running rspec as I'm specifically running just the tests for the attributes that are available.


Wouldn't it be better to use exclude pattern instead of includes? Also, it would deserve some comments a top of the BRs you exclude as well as in the %check section. Maybe it'd better to use `bcond_with` to enable the rest of the test suite, because in theory, for testing in mock, it should be enough to have the missing pieces installed by hand. But since it'd make the .spec file more complex, feel free to ignore this suggestion ;)

Also, I'd the dependencies on binaries, such as `BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/graphviz`(this might be a wrong example, since you require the graphviz-ruby, but you get the point).


Vít



Regards
Christopher

On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 10:19, Christopher Brown <chris.br...@redhat.com <mailto:chris.br...@redhat.com>> wrote:

    Neal, Dan,

    Thanks both, I think we have a way forward. I'll start the dialog
    upstream.

    @Neal - would it be possible to update the Fedora wiki regarding
    bundling Nodejs deps? Not sure if it needs to be:

    
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries
    
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries>

    or

    https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js
    <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Node.js>

    I'm unable to do so because I get the error message: "The action
    you have requested is limited to users in the group: Packaging."

    On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 at 22:06, Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com
    <mailto:ngomp...@gmail.com>> wrote:

        On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 10:41 AM Christopher Brown
        <chris.br...@redhat.com <mailto:chris.br...@redhat.com>> wrote:
        >
        > Hi Dan,
        >
        > Thanks for this. The issue I think is that there is a large
        number of dependencies and AIUI, Fedora doesn't allow these to
        be bundled with the gem[1]. This means a fairly significant
        task creating packages for a variety of nodejs dependencies
        amongst other things, e.g. Vega[2] has a fairly rapid release
        schedule.
        >
        > The more I consider the situation, the more I'm thinking
        that rpm is not the correct packaging format for
        asciidoctor-pdf and friends given their long list of
        dependencies and that a better fit would be a containerised
        deployment or perhaps flatpak/snap.
        >
        > However I thought I'd put this out for further responses
        from anyone with a vested interest.
        >
        > 1.
        
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries
        
<https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bundled_Libraries?rd=Packaging:Bundled_Libraries>
        > 2. https://github.com/vega/vega/tags
        <https://github.com/vega/vega/tags>
        >

        Bundling Nodejs dependencies is perfectly fine. Most of us do that
        now. Gem and C/C++ dependencies should not be bundled, though.



-- 真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
        _______________________________________________
        ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
        <mailto:ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org>
        To unsubscribe send an email to
        ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
        <mailto:ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org>
        Fedora Code of Conduct:
        https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
        <https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/>
        List Guidelines:
        https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
        <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines>
        List Archives:
        
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
        
<https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org>



-- Christopher Brown
    Senior Consultant
    Red Hat UK Ltd
    chris.br...@redhat.com <mailto:chris.br...@redhat.com>



--
Christopher Brown
Senior Consultant
Red Hat UK Ltd
chris.br...@redhat.com <mailto:chris.br...@redhat.com>

_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org

Attachment: OpenPGP_0x0CE09EE79917B87C.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to