[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE Last Closed||2013-10-13 13:10:39 --- Comment #12 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- Built on all branches, push requested for F-20 and below, closing. Thank you for review and git procedure. -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #10 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: rubygem-domain_name Short Description: Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby Owners: mtasaka Branches: f18 f19 f20 InitialCC: -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 --- Comment #11 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 --- Comment #8 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- Thank you for comments! http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name-0.5.13-2.fc.src.rpm http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name.spec * Fri Oct 11 2013 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org - 0.5.13-2 - Remove redundant BR -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #9 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com --- Looks good to me! Approved. -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640
Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
--- Comment #7 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com ---
Package Review
==
Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed
Issues:
===
- At the %if 0%{?fedora} = 19 conditional, when that conditional
evaluates to false, then Requires: ruby will be set twice.
Please fix the above issue and I'll approve the package. I'm also listing a
couple of non-blocking suggestions, in order of importance:
- I recommend using HTTPS in the Source0 URL.
- You have a Requires: ruby(release) along with Requires: ruby. IMHO these
are duplicate requirements and the latter (plain ruby) should be
deleted.
- My preference would be to modify the test/* files during %prep, instead of
during %check.
= 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]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must
be documented in the spec.
[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.
[-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
Provides are present.
[!]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
See note at the top of the review about Requires: ruby.
[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: No rpmlint messages.
[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]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
[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).
[x]: Package contains Requires: ruby(release).
= SHOULD items =
Generic:
[-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file
from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||ktdre...@ktdreyer.com Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|ktdre...@ktdreyer.com Flags||fedora-review? --- Comment #6 from Ken Dreyer ktdre...@ktdreyer.com --- I can take this review. -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 --- Comment #5 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name-0.5.13-1.fc.src.rpm * Tue Oct 8 2013 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org - 0.5.13-1 - 0.5.13 -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 Bug 904640 depends on bug 904639, which changed state. Bug 904639 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-unf - Wrapper library to bring Unicode Normalization Form support to Ruby/JRuby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904639 What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution|--- |NEXTRELEASE -- 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 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 --- Comment #4 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name-0.5.11-1.fc.src.rpm * Mon Apr 29 2013 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org - 0.5.11-1 - 0.5.11 Mock build for F-19: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/MOCK-rubygem-domain_name.log -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=8RCcUZHRy9a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 --- Comment #3 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name-0.5.9-1.fc.src.rpm * Fri Mar 22 2013 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org - 0.5.9-1 - 0.5.9 Mock build log on F-20: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/MOCK-rubygem-domain_name.log -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=C0yDcUovEPa=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Depends On||904639 --- Comment #1 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- This bug depends on rubygem-unf, review request bug 904639 . Local mock build log: http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/MOCK-rubygem-domain_name.log -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=29cSX3Bik5a=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 904640] Review Request: rubygem-domain_name - Domain Name manipulation library for Ruby
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640 --- Comment #2 from Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org --- http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name.spec http://mtasaka.fedorapeople.org/Review_request/mechanize-related/rubygem-domain_name-0.5.7-2.fc.src.rpm * Sun Jan 27 2013 Mamoru TASAKA mtas...@fedoraproject.org - 0.5.7-2 - A bit clean up -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=cPGJakf09ba=cc_unsubscribe ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
