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=504476 --- Comment #15 from Matthew Kent <mkent@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-02-02 01:51:38 EST --- Would like to get this through to unblock bug 551817. (In reply to comment #14) > My comments (to mkent's 1.5.2-2) > > * License > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Overall: MIT > > LGPLv2+: > ./newgem_theme_generators/long_box_theme/templates/website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js > ./newgem_theme_generators/plain_theme/templates/website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js > ./website/javascripts/rounded_corners_lite.inc.js > ------------------------------------------------------------- > - The license tag should be "MIT and LGPLv2+". > Nice catch, fixed. > * Requires > - Currently I cannot figure out why "R: rubygem(activesupport)" is needed. > Also, I cannot figure out why "['activesupport','>= 2.0.2']," is in > Rakefile. > I'm not sure either, especially as rubigen already requires activesupport. Maybe the developer covering up for a broken dependency in rubigen? I'll comment it out and open an issue with the developer. > - Would you check if the following dependencies are optional or > rather mandatory? > ------------------------------------------------------------- > ./lib/newgem/rubyforge-ext.rb: require 'rubyforge' > ------------------------------------------------------------- Looks pretty mandatory to me and is currently pulled in by the hoe dependency. Having trouble recalling the best practice for this and can't spot it in the guidelines - should I be explicitly listing rubyforge as a dependency? -- 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review