Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894524 Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx --- Comment #7 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #5) > -doc package either need to requires the main package, or it need to ship > the license file. Actually it already requires the main package and that is the only possibility in this case. Not because of the license, but because of the doc folder ownership. BTW, Troy, * there is %{gem_docdir} macro which you should use instead of %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version} and it should be marked as a %doc * %doc %{gem_instdir}/Gemfile in contrary should not be marked as a doc, since it is obviously not documentation. * What is the content of %{gem_instdir}/vendor ? Even the name is scary and suggest some bundling, which is prohibited on Fedora [1]. I admit that I did not checked what is inside, though * I would appreciate if you can run some test suite, if feasible. * You should be using %gem_install macro [2] (especially because your install command does not generate RDoc documentation, which we used to have available on Fedora. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_libraries [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/256 -- 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=DZO4WYjZZX&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review