[Bug 889011] Review Request: rubygem-asciidoctor - A pure Ruby implementation of AsciiDoc

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

 



Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=889011

--- Comment #2 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
* gem is not available upstream
  - Review guidelines [1] says: "MUST: The sources used to build the package
    must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL." Your package
    builds on top of version 0.0.8, which is newer then the version available
on
    RubyGems. It would be nice if you can either release 0.0.8 to rubygems.org
    (I would suggest this as a the best option) or if you can at least describe
    how you obtained the gem you are providing (but in this case, it would be
    probably better to provide tarball and use some pre-release versioning
[2]).

* Exclude %{gem_cache}
  - We typically exclude %{gem_cache} from the package:

    %exclude %{gem_cache}

    The %{gem_cache} has no meaning on Fedora, since you can achieve similar
    goals to purpose of %{gem_cache} by RPM means.

* Comment patches
  - If you include patches in your SRPM, it is usually good idea to introduce
    them with comment what they are good for, typically including for example
    upstream commit or issue reference.

* Follow %build and %install sections of Ruby packaging guidelines
  - Could you please modify the %build and %install section according to Ruby
    Packaging Guideliens [3]? It would help in the future during possible
    automatic rebuilds of packages as well as other maintainers to understand
to
    your package. There are also small differences for example
      - Difference between upstream .gemspec file and the .gemspec file
        generated by RubyGems during installation of gem
      - Difference in binary. The binary generated by RubyGems is not the same
        file as the binary in your gem's bin folder.

I will stop the review at this point, since the change of %build and %install
sections is substantial, so it could made my other comments irrelevant. Please
update the package before we continue. Thank you.


[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ReviewGuidelines
[2]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Pre-Release_packages
[3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Building_gems

-- 
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=1WOyQrIjxX&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
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]