[Bug 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=728256 Björn "besser82" Esser changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) | Referenced Bugs: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 --- Comment #3 from Guillermo Gómez 2011-11-19 10:36:38 EST --- Cant find the srpm file, could you please refresh the links? (apologies for the delay) 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 --- Comment #4 from Emanuel Rietveld 2011-11-20 04:50:06 EST --- Tar gz of everything in my rails23 repo, most recent commit: http://xls01.freecult.org/pkg/?p=pkg.git;a=snapshot;h=rails23;sf=tgz Direct link to current source rpm: http://xls01.freecult.org/pkg/?p=pkg.git;a=blob_plain;f=SRPMS/rubygem-activesupport2.3-2.3.14-1.fc15.src.rpm;h=rails23 I do like keeping my packaging work in git, but I still need to get some more userfriendly interface. Thanks Emanuel -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256
Guillermo Gómez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #5 from Guillermo Gómez 2011-11-23
09:51:34 EST ---
Key:
- = N/A
x = Check
! = Problem
? = Not evaluated
[x] : MUST - Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported architecture.
[x] : MUST - Fully versioned dependency in subpackages, if present.
[x] : MUST - Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la)
[-] : MUST - Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=...
doesn't work.
[x] : MUST - Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
NOTE: not a blocker, but i would suggest to get rid of the epoch field.
Its not needed and would simply naming the package (this is a brand new
package, please adjust changelog if done)
[x] : MUST - Sources used to build the package matches the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
[x] : MUST - Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-] : MUST - Rpmlint output is silent.
[x] : MUST - Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and
meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x] : MUST - All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x] : MUST - Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x] : MUST - Changelog in prescribed format.
[x] : MUST - Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[x] : MUST - Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x] : MUST - Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x] : MUST - Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x] : MUST - Permissions on files are set properly.
[x] : MUST - Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x] : MUST - Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-] : MUST - 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] : MUST - License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[-] : MUST - License file installed when any subpackage combination is
installed.
[x] : MUST - Package consistently uses macros. instead of hard-coded directory
names.
[x] : MUST - Package meets the Packaging Guidelines.
[-] : MUST - Package does not generates any conflict.
[-] : MUST - Package does not contains kernel modules.
[x] : MUST - Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x] : MUST - Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x] : MUST - Package installs properly.
[-] : MUST - Rpath absent or only used for internal libs.
[x] : MUST - Package is not relocatable.
[x] : MUST - Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[x] : MUST - Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x] : MUST - File names are valid UTF-8.
[x] : SHOULD - Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock/koji.
[x] : SHOULD - Dist tag is present.
[x] : SHOULD - SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}.
[x] : SHOULD - SourceX is a working URL.
[x] : SHOULD - Spec use %global instead of %define.
[x] : SHOULD - No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x] : SHOULD - Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm
-q --requires).
[x] : SHOULD - Latest version is packaged.
[x] : SHOULD - Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x] : SHOULD - Patches link to upstream bugs/comments/lists or are otherwise
justified.
[x] : SHOULD - Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all
supported architectures.
[x] : SHOULD - %check is present and all tests pass.
NOTE: test passes 100% in koji but some tests fails in my station, there has
to be some test dependencies hiden.
[x] : SHOULD - Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
Toshio, i think this one is clean enough in order to sponsor Emanuel.
APPROVED
--
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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 --- Comment #6 from Emanuel Rietveld 2011-11-23 12:01:35 EST --- Thank you Guillermo. I have removed the Epoch field and updated the changelog. Can you please give me more information about the failing tests? Which tests fail? They all pass on my workstation in Mock. -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Emanuel Rietveld changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #7 from Emanuel Rietveld 2011-11-25 04:01:26 EST --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-activesupport2.3 Short Description: Support and utility classes used by the Rails 2.3 framework Owners: codehotter Branches: f15 f16 InitialCC: -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 --- Comment #8 from Jon Ciesla 2011-11-27 16:58:03 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Emanuel Rietveld changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2012-01-06 11:26:43 --- Comment #9 from Emanuel Rietveld 2012-01-06 11:26:43 EST --- Built successfully http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=281645 -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System 2012-01-09 03:46:29 EST --- rubygem-activesupport2.3-2.3.14-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/rubygem-activesupport2.3-2.3.14-1.fc16 -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Emanuel Rietveld changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR) -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Emanuel Rietveld changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||726690 -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Emanuel Rietveld changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||728255 -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Emanuel Rietveld changed: What|Removed |Added Blocks||728249 -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 Guillermo Gómez changed: What|Removed |Added CC||guillermo.go...@gmail.com AssignedTo|nob...@fedoraproject.org|guillermo.go...@gmail.com Flag||fedora-review? --- Comment #1 from Guillermo Gómez 2011-08-10 08:30:58 EDT --- According my deps this the first pkg to review, i will take it and find sponshorship for u if possible. -- 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 728256] Review Request: rubygem-activesupport2.3 - rails 2 alongside rails 3
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=728256 --- Comment #2 from Emanuel Rietveld 2011-08-10 09:58:57 EDT --- Created attachment 517615 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=517615 rpmlint output Pushed new package to replace incorrect Rakefile version in .src.rpm. Full rpmlint output (233 warnings) attached. There are many warnings related to 'unexpanded macro' which are actually escaped characters, like %3f, in the filenames of the ri documentation. The previous version of the package, activesupport-2.3.8 in F14, had these warnings as well. $ rpmlint /var/lib/mock/fedora-15-x86_64/result/*.rpm | grep -v unexpanded-macro rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/failover-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/namespace-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/TZInfo/TimezonePeriod/end_transition-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/logger-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/timeout-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/Server/host-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/Server/retry-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/no_reply-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/Server/port-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/multithread-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/Server/weight-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/cache.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/Server/status-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/TZInfo/TimezonePeriod/offset-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/TZInfo/TimezonePeriod/start_transition-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/MemCache/servers-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.noarch: W: wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/activesupport-2.3.12/ri/ActiveSupport/CoreExtensions/Numeric/Time/since-i.ri rubygem-activesupport2.3.src: W: invalid-url Source2: activesupport-23-tests.tgz rubygem-activesupport2.3.src: W: file-size-mismatch Rakefile = 5371, https://raw.github.com/rails/rails/v2.3.12/activesupport/Rakefile = 1 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 233 warnings. If ignoring the unexpanded-macro warnings of the ri documentation, there are several warnings left. First a list of 'wrong-file-end-of-line-encoding'. I am reluctant to fix these, because stripping \r from actionpack files has been known to break rails before - see comment of mmorsi in that spec file. Besides, the files are not plain text files, but binary documentation files. It is unclear what the effect of stripping \r characters out of a binary file will be. Of course, I am open to a difference of opinion. Next one, invalid-url, is to be expected. For some reason the tests are not packaged in the upstream source gem, so the activesupport-23-tests.tgz source is created from git. The procedure for reproducing activesupport-23-tests.tgz is documented in the spec file. Finally, however, I do not understand the file-size-mismatch at all. curl -O https://raw.github.com/rails/rails/v2.3.12/activesupport/Rakefile results in a file with size of 5371 which is in every respect identical to the file in the source rpm. What is rpmlint complaining about 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
