https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=786249 Russell Harrison <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW --- Comment #13 from Russell Harrison <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #12) > Sorry for the delay, here are my comments: > - Is Requires: puppet really needed? Isn't it possible to lint the puppet > files without actually having puppet installed? I think you're right, v0.2.0 looks like it dropped the puppet requirement from the gem. I'll drop it from the package as well. > - BuildRequires: rubygem(rspec-core) should be BuildRequires: rubygem(rspec) > from F17 and above. OK, I was trying to bring in as little as possible required for the tests to run. I'll change it to match standard practice. > - BuildRequires: rubygem(rdoc) is not necessary, rdoc gets automatically > drawn in by rubygems, that generate the documentation. Removed > - Some files should be moved to -doc subpackage. The rule of thumb we use > here is: if it is not needed for runtime, put it in the -doc subpackage. > Moreover, the packages that actually are documentation, like rdoc files or > README, should still be marked %doc even in the subpackage. Other files, as > Rakefile, should be moved to -doc subpackage while not being marked as %doc. > LICENSE should be marked as %doc, but should stay in the main package. So > please move Rakefile, spec and README to -doc subpackage. Even README? That seems a bit extreme, I would think that at least that minimal level of documentation should remain with the main package. Moving the requested files to the doc subpackage. > - It is customary (but not required) not to remove the > %{buildroot}/%{gem_instdir}/.*, but %exclude them in the file listing > (consider this a nice-to-have, certainly not a blocker). That seems cleaner to me as well. I'm not a fan of removing things during rpm builds. > - %{buildroot}/%{gem_instdir}/%{gem_name}.gemspec file is usually kept in > the package and placed in the -doc, while not being marked as %doc :) Done > Please post the new spec/srpm. The package looks good in overall, so I think > there will be no further problems when you fix the ones above. Great! I'll test out these changes this morning and post the new files later today. -- 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