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