[Bug 839064] Review Request: rubygem-openshift-origin-common - OpenShift Origin library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839064

--- Comment #37 from Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
Brenton,

Spec file looks pretty good.  While not forbidden by the packaging guidelines,
I generally feel it is bad practice to have conditionals in a spec file for
EPEL vs Fedora.  They are separate distributions with separate dependency
chains.  By focusing the spec file for "fedora only" all this nonsense
disappears:

# Conditionally set required macros for distros without rubygems-devel This can
# be removed once https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=788001 is
# resolved.
%if 0%{?el6}%{?fc16}
%global rubyabi 1.8
%global gem_dir %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir' 2>/dev/null)
%global gem_cache %{gem_dir}/cache/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gem
%global gem_docdir %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version}
%global gem_instdir %{gem_dir}/gems/%{gem_name}-%{version}
%global gem_libdir %{gem_instdir}/lib
%global gem_spec %{gem_dir}/specifications/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gemspec
%endif

%if 0%{?rhel} == 6
BuildRequires:  rubygems
%else
BuildRequires:  rubygems-devel
%endif

This also prevents the developer from doing something like copying the fedora
spec file around to EPEL (because that is easy, vs actually looking at the EPEL
spec) which could result in breakage later.  Instead I would recommend
maintaining two separate spec files for your sanity, but again, it is up to the
packager.

I'll provide full review next.

-- 
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



[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]