[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

Björn "besser82" Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|ASSIGNED                    |POST
              Flags|                            |fedora-cvs?



--- Comment #9 from Björn "besser82" Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> ---
Updated package:

  %changelog
  * Thu Dec 12 2013 Björn Esser <bjoern.esser@xxxxxxxxx> - 0.1.2-3
  - improvements as recommended in review by Vít Ondruch (vondruch)
    from comments #7 and #8 (#1040453)

  * 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-0.1.2-3.fc20.src.rpm


Koji Builds for updated package:

  el5:  no build ---> missing dependencies
  el6:  no build ---> missing dependencies
  F18:  no build ---> missing dependencies, will be soon EOL
  F19:  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6283070
  F20:  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6283074
  Frh:  http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=6283076


(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #7)
> That is one possibility, the easier one is:
> 
> rspec spec
> 
> The example is actually in guidelines ;) I also suggest to run the test
> suite on "build" gem, not the "expanded", i.e. surroudn the execution by
> "pushd .%{gem_instdir} ... popd"

Changed the %check-target accordingly.  Thanks for your proposal.


(In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #8)
> And I have a few remarks:
> 
> * %{gem_cache}
>   - For simplification, I would drop it on every OS. It is lightly mentioned
>     just in old guidelines, which are currently aimed on EPEL5, but it makes
>     (almost) no difference if the cache is kept or not.

dropped on every OS.


> * Shebang change
>   - Although there is no difference in functionality, we are typically doing
>     such changes in %install section.

Thats a matter of preference, isn't it?  On most every other language's package
I've seen so far this is done during %prep.  So I'll keep it this way.


> The above remarks are just minor nits and otherwise the package looks sane
> => APPROVED.

Many thanks for the review, Vít!


New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: rubygem-rspec-longrun
Short Description: RSpec formatter for long-running specs
Owners: besser82
Branches: el5 el6 f18 f19 f20
InitialCC:

-- 
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]