[Bug 1319289] Review Request: rubygem-review - Flexible document format/conversion system

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319289



--- Comment #4 from Antonio Trande <anto.trande@xxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Mukundan Ragavan from comment #3)
> Package Review
> ==============
> 
> 
> - If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s)
>   in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s)
>   for the package is included in %license.
>   Note: Cannot find COPYING in rpm(s)
>   See:
>   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
> 
> 
> ---> License file is installed in the main package.
> 
> /usr/share/gems/gems/review-1.7.2/COPYING
> 
> 
> But, license file should be installed like this - 
> 
> %license %{gem_instdir}/LICENSE
> 

Okay.


> ===== SHOULD items =====
> 
> Generic:
> [?]: Avoid bundling fonts in non-fonts packages.
>      Note: Package contains font files
> 
> ---> As far as I can tell, this is ok since it's used in examples, I think.
> 
> /usr/share/doc/rubygem-review/html/fonts/Lato-Light.ttf
> /usr/share/doc/rubygem-review/html/fonts/Lato-LightItalic.ttf
> /usr/share/doc/rubygem-review/html/fonts/Lato-Regular.ttf
> /usr/share/doc/rubygem-review/html/fonts/Lato-RegularItalic.ttf
> /usr/share/doc/rubygem-review/html/fonts/SourceCodePro-Bold.ttf
> /usr/share/doc/rubygem-review/html/fonts/SourceCodePro-Regular.ttf
> 
> Am I right? Can you check?

See bz#1224715.


> Ruby:
> [!]: Gem package should exclude cached Gem.
> 
> ---> I cannot find reference to excluding cached gem here -
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby
> 
> 
> Can you please verify this?

Cache excluded.

> 
> [!]: Gem should use %gem_install macro.

It's used.

> [!]: Specfile should use macros from rubygem-devel package.
>      Note: The specfile doesn't use these macros: %doc %{gem_docdir},
>      %exclude %{gem_cache}, %{gem_libdir}
> 
> ---> Please revisit macros.

Okay.

> /usr/share/gems/gems/review-1.7.2/lib/uuid.rb 644 /usr/bin/env
> 
> ---> Please review.

Fixed.

> 
> rubygem-review.noarch: E: incorrect-fsf-address
> /usr/share/gems/gems/review-1.7.2/COPYING
> rubygem-review.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> /usr/share/gems/gems/review-1.7.2/.rubocop_todo.yml
> rubygem-review.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> /usr/share/gems/gems/review-1.7.2/.travis.yml
> rubygem-review.noarch: W: hidden-file-or-dir
> /usr/share/gems/gems/review-1.7.2/.rubocop.yml
> 
> ---> Needed?

Removed.

Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-review/rubygem-review.spec
SRPM URL:
https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-review/rubygem-review-1.7.2-2.fc23.src.rpm

-- 
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
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]