[Bug 1040453] Review Request: rubygem-rspec-longrun - RSpec formatter for long-running specs

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1040453



--- Comment #4 from Björn "besser82" Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Updated package:

  %changelog
  * Wed Dec 11 2013 Björn Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> - 0.1.2-2
  - improvements as recommended in review by Vít Ondruch (vondruch)
    from comments #2 and #3  (#1040453)

  * Sun Dec 08 2013 Björn Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> - 0.1.2-1
  - Initial rpm release (#1040453)


Urls:

  Spec URL: http://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/rubygem-rspec-longrun.spec
  SRPM URL:
http://besser82.fedorapeople.org/review/rubygem-rspec-longrun-0.1.2-2.fc20.src.rpm


(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #2)
> * Bundler, Rake
>   - We are typically trying to get rid of these (an usually quite
> successfully).

How would one usually accoplish this?!?  I'm actually new to Ruby stuff and
need to learn about that  :(  In fact this is my 2nd rubygem-package.


> * Move documentation into -doc subpackage
>   - Large documentation is usually good to split into -doc subpackage
>   - You can move there also all files not needed for runtime, i.e. examples,
>     spec, Gemfile, Rakefile

done


> * Gem repack
>   - Please go with 'gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec' as
>     specified in guidelines. You will save yourself the 'git' kung-fu.
>   - The upstream .gemspec, although provided, was never intended to be used
>     for repackaging.

done


> * %gem_install in EPEL6
>   - Since RHEL 6.5, rubygems know how to use %gem_install macro. This applies
>     also to rubygems-devel package (these two are related).

done


> * URL:
>   - The upstream url should be http://github.com/mdub/rspec-longrun if I am
>     not wrong

replaced


(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #3)
> And several more:
> 
> * ruby(abi) vs ruby(release)
>   - R; ruby(release) have to be used since F19 and it should be non-versioned
>     (unless there is some special need)
>   - I would drop %{ruby_ver} macro and went with 1.8 instead. Using such
>     macro was never recomended and I personally find its programatical
>     determination a bit dangerous.

done


> * s/Config/RbConfig/
>   - Config was deprecated long time ago. RbConfig should be used instead.

replaced


Thanks for your comments and improvements Vít!  I hope you'll give this another
run...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
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]