[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||CURRENTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-02-28 15:01:17 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #15 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2012-01-25 09:01:49 EST --- Just FYI, I proposed to migrate the rubygem-rspec from RSpec 1.3 to RSpec 2.x today [1]. Otherwise, I have no other objections = APPROVED [1] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2012-January/000838.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #16 from Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com 2012-01-25 10:02:58 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-rr Short Description: RR (Double Ruby) is a test double framework Owners: gomix Branches: f15 f16 el6 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #17 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com 2012-01-25 20:42:35 EST --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #14 from Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com 2012-01-24 10:18:35 EST --- Most of the issues were addressed, however there are a couple of worth mentioning comments: 1. I could get rid of rubygem-session dep, but, i did introduced it already in Fedora, still it has some troubles to build in rawhide i need to fix, so rubygem-rr will work with rubygem-session actually available in updates-testing. 2. Test suite is enabled and working without bundler and rake. 3. rspec version issue remains (1.x) 4. Yes i will start working on ruby 1.9 versions of all my pkgs soon. SPEC:http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rr/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM:http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rr/rubygem-rr-1.0.4-2.fc16.src.rpm $ rpmlint -v SPECS/rubygem-rr.spec SPECS/rubygem-rr.spec: I: checking-url http://rubygems.org/gems/rr-1.0.4.gem (timeout 10 seconds) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64-testing/result/rubygem-rr-1.0.4-2.fc16.noarch.rpm rubygem-rr.noarch: I: checking rubygem-rr.noarch: I: checking-url http://pivotallabs.com (timeout 10 seconds) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64-testing/result/rubygem-rr-doc-1.0.4-2.fc16.noarch.rpm rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: I: checking rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: I: checking-url http://pivotallabs.com (timeout 10 seconds) rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/Strategies/StrategyMethods/stub%21-i.yaml %21 ... ... ... rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/RecordedCalls/any%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Injections/DoubleInjection/subject_has_original_method_missing%3f-i.yaml %3f 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 86 warnings. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||guillermo.go...@gmail.com --- Comment #10 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2012-01-23 03:00:23 EST --- *** Bug 783791 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #11 from Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com 2012-01-23 08:49:08 EST --- I would like to pick this one if there's no objection. SRPM: http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rr/rubygem-rr-1.0.4-1.fc16.src.rpm SPEC: http://gomix.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rr/rubygem-rr.spec Description: RR (Double Ruby) is a double framework that features a rich selection of double techniques and a terse syntax $ rpmlint -v SPECS/rubygem-rr.spec SPECS/rubygem-rr.spec: I: checking-url http://rubygems.org/gems/rr-1.0.4.gem (timeout 10 seconds) 0 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/rubygem-rr-1.0.4-1.fc16.noarch.rpm rubygem-rr.noarch: I: checking rubygem-rr.noarch: I: checking-url http://pivotallabs.com (timeout 10 seconds) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings. $ rpmlint -v /var/lib/mock/fedora-16-x86_64/result/rubygem-rr-doc-1.0.4-1.fc16.noarch.rpm rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: I: checking rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: I: checking-url http://pivotallabs.com (timeout 10 seconds) rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/Strategies/StrategyMethods/stub%21-i.yaml %21 rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/Strategies/StrategyMethods/dont_allow%21-i.yaml %21 rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/TimesCalledMatchers/AtMostMatcher/matches%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/DoubleDefinition/StateQueryMethods/verify_method_signature%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Injections/Injection/subject_has_original_method%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/TimesCalledMatchers/IntegerMatcher/possible_match%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/DoubleDefinitionCreate/StrategySetupMethods/implementation_strategy%3d-i.yaml %3d rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/Strategies/StrategyMethods/mock%21-i.yaml %21 rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Double/subject_accepts_only_varargs%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Double/ordered%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/WildcardMatchers/HashIncluding/eql%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Double/wildcard_match%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/DoubleDefinition/StateQueryMethods/strong%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/WildcardMatchers/HashIncluding/%3d%3d-i.yaml %3d rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/WildcardMatchers/HashIncluding/%3d%3d-i.yaml %3d rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/Strategies/StrategyMethods/any_instance_of%21-i.yaml %21 rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/TimesCalledMatchers/IntegerMatcher/matches%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/TimesCalledMatchers/IntegerMatcher/attempt%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/DoubleDefinitions/DoubleDefinition/StateQueryMethods/implementation_is_original_method%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Double/arity_matches%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Adapters/Rspec/InvocationMatcher/nil%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/TimesCalledMatchers/NeverMatcher/attempt%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/WildcardMatchers/DuckType/eql%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/WildcardMatchers/Boolean/%3d%3d-i.yaml %3d rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/WildcardMatchers/Boolean/%3d%3d-i.yaml %3d rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/rr-1.0.4/ri/RR/Double/attempt%3f-i.yaml %3f rubygem-rr-doc.noarch: W: unexpanded-macro
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #12 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2012-01-23 10:52:50 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) I would like to pick this one if there's no objection. I spoke to Michal and he seems to be fine with you finishing the review. So I'll do the review of your .spec. * ruby_sitearch - This macro is not used in your spec, please remove it. * Summary is not descriptive - It would be nice if you can extend the summary a bit. * Test suite - Usage of Rake just brings in unnecessary dependencies. Please do not use rake. - Please do not use Bundler for running test suite. It usually requires gems which are not really necessary (for example session appears to be one of them) and versions not available in Fedora (for example ruby-debug). In the end, it is easier to remove the Bundler dependency: sed -i -e '/require bundler/d' spec/environment_fixture_setup.rb sed -i -e '/require bundler/d' spec/spec_suite.rb - Use RSpec 2.x. I'd like to see RSpec 1.x to die and it would be shame to introduce newly reviewed gem which depends on RSpec 1.x. Unfortunately, the test suite is not yet working with RSpec 2.x, although it seems there is already pull request [1] to add this support. * Do not mark spec and benchmarks as a %doc - The spec and benchamrks are not documentation, so please remove the %doc macro. * Exclude the cached version of gem - In RPM based system, there is no need to cache the .gem file. Please consider its removal. BTW, since I hope Ruby 1.9.3 will be today approved by FESCo, have you considered to provide .spec file for Ruby 1.9? [1] https://github.com/btakita/rr/pull/68 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #13 from Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com 2012-01-23 11:27:53 EST --- (In reply to comment #12) (In reply to comment #11) I would like to pick this one if there's no objection. I spoke to Michal and he seems to be fine with you finishing the review. So I'll do the review of your .spec. Ok thanks, i will take care about the issues you pointed later today if nothing else gets in my way. - Guillermo - -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #9 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-07-20 06:45:07 EDT --- Ping? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #8 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-05-24 06:47:52 EDT --- Ping? Any update here? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583
--- Comment #7 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-04-05 12:02:33 EDT
---
* New upstream version available
- Please consider updating to the latest version.
* RSpec 2.x
- While upstream is using RSpec 1.3, it would be wise to use RSpec 2.x
available
in F15 and Rawhide. However I am not sure it is feasible. So take it just
as a hint.
* Cleaning
- rm -rf %{buildroot} at the top of %install, %clean section
are no longer needed:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean
* Patching
- The patching during installation changes unnecessarily the gem. Please do
gem install in prep section. Execute the test in %{_builddir} instead of
%{buildroot} and do patching right before the test start
- Note that Bundler is already available in Fedora
* Move nonessential files into doc subpackage
- Please consider moving nonessential files into -doc subpackage, e.g.
CHANGES,
VERSION.yml, Gemfile
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||vondr...@redhat.com --- Comment #6 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com 2011-03-17 10:36:07 EDT --- This appears to be the new spec with updated license: Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr-1.0.0-3.fc14.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Jozef Zigmund jzigm...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|jzigm...@redhat.com |vondr...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Jozef Zigmund jzigm...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|mma...@redhat.com |jzigm...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Marek Mahut mma...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||mma...@redhat.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|mma...@redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583
--- Comment #4 from Jozef Zigmund jzigm...@redhat.com 2010-10-26 13:35:57 EDT
---
(In reply to comment #3)
This review it's just NONFORMAL because i'm not in Fedora Packager Group right
now.
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
License: GPLv2+ or Ruby
[BAD - This gem have other license (MIT)]
MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted in the
review.
rpmlint rubygem-rr-1.0.0-2.fc13.src.rpm
rubygem-rr.src: W: no-buildroot-tag
rubygem-rr.src: W: patch-not-applied Patch0: %{name}-remove-bundler.patch
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[It seems OK , but i'm not sure about 2nd warning]
Each Ruby package MUST indicate the Ruby ABI version it depends on with a line
like:
Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8
[OK - this MUST condition is written via macro in this spec file]
Packages that contain Ruby Gems MUST be called rubygem-%{gemname} where
gemname
is the name from the Gem's specification.
%global gemname rr
Name: rubygem-%{gemname}
[OK]
The Source of the package MUST be the full URL to the released Gem archive
URL: http://pivotallabs.com
Source0: http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}.gem
[OK]
The version of the package MUST be the Gem's version
Version: 1.0.0
[OK]
The package MUST have a Requires and a BuildRequires on rubygems
%global rubyabi 1.8
Requires: ruby(abi) = %{rubyabi}
Requires: rubygems
BuildRequires: rubygems
BuildRequires: rubygem(rspec)
[OK]
The Gem MUST be installed into %{gemdir} defined as:
%global gemdir %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir' 2/dev/null)
[OK]
If the Gem only contains pure Ruby code, it MUST be marked as BuildArch:
noarch
BuildArch: noarch
[OK]
The package MUST own the following files and directories:
%{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/
%{gemdir}/cache/%{gemname}-%{version}.gem
%{gemdir}/specifications/%{gemname}-%{version}.gemspec
[OK]
The install SHOULD be performed with the command
gem install --local --install-dir %{buildroot}%{gemdir} --force %{SOURCE0}
[OK]
Please check this review also someone else (the best, who is sponsor)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review mailing list
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 --- Comment #1 from Michal Fojtik mfoj...@redhat.com 2010-10-13 08:05:40 EDT --- * Wed Oct 13 2010 Michal Fojtik mfoj...@redhat.com - 1.0.0-2 - Added patch which remove bundler require Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr-1.0.0-2.fc13.src.rpm Koji build is now gree: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2532193 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 642583] Review Request: rubygem-rr - RR is a framework that features a rich selection of double techniques
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642583 Jozef Zigmund jzigm...@redhat.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jzigm...@redhat.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #2 from Jozef Zigmund jzigm...@redhat.com 2010-10-13 08:41:13 EDT --- I will take this review -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
