https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |CLOSED
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|652183 (FE-JAVASIG) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #17 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/jruby-rack.spec
SRPM URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/jruby-rack-1.1.13.2-1.fc19.src.rpm
- update to 1.1.13.2
- removed rubygem subpackage, fails
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #15 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #14)
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #13)
Gil, I'm still wondering, why don't you package it just as a gem (see
comment #4). What is the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #16 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #15)
You said, that the library is usable without JRuby, then it makes sense to
have the dependencies.
I should rather say the library is usable
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #13 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
Gil, I'm still wondering, why don't you package it just as a gem (see comment
#4). What is the point of keeping the maven stuff and -javadoc subpackages
around? They are not distributed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #14 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #13)
Gil, I'm still wondering, why don't you package it just as a gem (see
comment #4). What is the point of keeping the maven stuff and -javadoc
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #10 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
(In reply to gil cattaneo from comment #8)
- Disable gem task. Cause: jruby 1.7.x unable to initialized constant
Gem::Builder
jruby is broken, the maintainer removed all jruby Gem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #11 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/jruby-rack/2/jruby-rack.spec
SRPM URL:
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/jruby-rack/2/jruby-rack-1.0.10-3.fc18.src.rpm
- fixed problem with RubyGems 2.0
-
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #12 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5406764
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
Jason Tibbitts ti...@math.uh.edu changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||punto...@libero.it
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(puntogil@libero.i |
|t)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #9 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5401021
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
Bug 821146 depends on bug 819583, which changed state.
Bug 819583 Summary: add maven pom
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819583
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
Bug 821146 depends on bug 819587, which changed state.
Bug 819587 Summary: add maven pom
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=819587
What|Removed |Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #5 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Spec URL: http://gil.fedorapeople.org/jruby-rack/1/jruby-rack.spec
SRPM URL:
http://gil.fedorapeople.org/jruby-rack/1/jruby-rack-1.0.10-2.fc16.src.rpm
- Added tomcat 7.x apis support
- Added
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||652183 (FE-JAVASIG)
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #6 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
tested on: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4395814
without the proper bytelist (= 1.0.8-3) and jnr-constants (= 0.7-6) version
requires by pom file
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||vondr...@redhat.com
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #2 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
Hi Vit
http://rubygems.org/downloads/jruby-rack-1.1.7.gem
contains prebuild java libraries, no source code
jruby-rack 1.0.10 requires, for build, the actual jruby...
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #3 from gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it ---
for the newer version require jruby (?)= 1.6.7.2
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
package-review
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
--- Comment #4 from Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com ---
(In reply to comment #2)
Ah, that makes sense why to use the github and tarball as as source. Didn't
think about it.
But still, the question stays the same. From that sources, you could
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821146
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||848096
--
You are
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=821146
gil cattaneo punto...@libero.it changed:
What|Removed |Added
24 matches
Mail list logo
