[Bug 988890] Review Request: rubygem-sass-twitter-bootstrap - Gem of the Twitter Bootstrap

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=988890

--- Comment #1 from Troy Dawson <tdawson@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
RPMLINT VALUES:
$ rpmlint rubygem-sass-twitter-bootstrap.spec
rubygem-sass-twitter-bootstrap-2.0.1-1.fc20.src.rpm
rubygem-sass-twitter-bootstrap-2.0.1-1.fc20.noarch.rpm
rubygem-sass-twitter-bootstrap-doc-2.0.1-1.fc20.noarch.rpm
3 packages and 1 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.

REASON FOR OLDER VERSION OF GEM:
This package is for a couple of OpenShift packages that need this version. 
Upstream will not be able to update and test to the newer version of this gem
for several months.  There have been no security advisories about this gem that
require the newer versions.

REASON FOR THE VENDOR DIRECTORY:
We are following the footsteps of the rubygem-bootstrap-sass review[1].  That
review consulted with the ruby-sig and the consensus was to leave the bundled
javascript in until there are approved javascript guidelines.[2]
[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982679
[2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2013-July/001389.html

LICENSE:
The License is already in newer versions of the gem.  When we are able to
update to a newer version, we will use Upstreams file.

-- 
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=cwCKMKh1xZ&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]