[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Fixed In Version||rubygem-sprite-factory-1.6. ||1-1.fc22 Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE Last Closed||2014-08-27 03:31:23 -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #6 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com --- = MUST items = Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. [x]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [x]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: 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 is included in %doc. [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install' ' DESTDIR=... doesn't work. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size (~1MB) or number of files. Note: Documentation size is 0 bytes in 0 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local Ruby: [x]: Platform dependent files must all go under %{gem_extdir_mri}, platform independent under %{gem_dir}. [x]: Gem package must not define a non-gem subpackage [x]: Macro %{gem_extdir} is deprecated. [x]: Gem package is named rubygem-%{gem_name} [x]: Package contains BuildRequires: rubygems-devel. [x]: Gem package must define %{gem_name} macro. [x]: Pure Ruby package must be built as noarch [x]: Package does not contain Requires: ruby(abi). = SHOULD items = Generic: [-]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages. Note: Package contains font files [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane [-]: Fully versioned dependency in subpackages if applicable. Note: No Requires: %{name}%{?_isa} = %{version}-%{release} in rubygem- sprite-factory-doc [?]: Package functions as described. [!]: Latest version is packaged. version 1.6.1 has been release in mean time. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [x]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Packager, Vendor, PreReq, Copyright tags should not be in spec file [x]: Sources can be
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Thanks, I will. New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-sprite-factory Short Description: Automatic CSS sprite generator Upstream URL: https://github.com/jakesgordon/sprite-factory Owners: jstribny Branches: f21 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 --- Comment #2 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- You are right, seems like the test suite is unstable running different number of assertions (210|211). I adjusted the spec to accept both: Spec URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/obs/rubygem-sprite-factory.spec SRPM URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/obs/rubygem-sprite-factory-1.6.0-1.fc22.src.rpm Note: I didn't bump the spec. -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 --- Comment #3 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com --- Hmm still: + ruby -rminitest/autorun -rrubygems -Ilib:test - + egrep '43 runs, 21. assertions, 3 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips.*' -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 --- Comment #4 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com --- rubygem-sprite-factory.spec:69: W: deprecated-grep [u'egrep'] Direct use of grep as egrep or fgrep is deprecated in GNU grep and historical in POSIX, use grep -E and grep -F instead. -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 --- Comment #5 from Josef Stribny jstri...@redhat.com --- Spec URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/obs/rubygem-sprite-factory.spec SRPM URL: http://data-strzibny.rhcloud.com/obs/rubygem-sprite-factory-1.6.0-2.fc22.src.rpm Unfortunately it was worse than I expected. I allowed (2|3) failures now, I didn't get any other for the known issues. Hopefully that's enough. -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|msu...@redhat.com Flags||fedora-review? -- 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
[Bug 1121080] Review Request: rubygem-sprite-factory - Automatic CSS sprite generator
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121080 --- Comment #1 from Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com --- Hmm package does not build: + ruby -rminitest/autorun -rrubygems -Ilib:test - + egrep '43 runs, 211 assertions, 3 failures, 0 errors, 0 skips.*' -- 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