[Bug 1871157] Review Request: rubygem-ronn-ng - Manual authoring tool

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

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1871157

Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Flags|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+



--- Comment #7 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek from comment #6)
> Thanks!
> 
> (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #5)
> > * Test suite
> Yep, I did that, and the tests pass.

We typically execute test in `pushd .%{gem_instdir}`, because that is the final
layout as after `gem install` call.

> > * Soft dependency on groff-base?
> >   - The `Requires: groff-base` could be possibly changed to `Recommends`.
> > This could help if Ronn is used as Ruby library. OTOH,
> >     if it is included into buildroot to generate documentation, the soft
> > dependency would not be installed and that could be annoying.
> >   - Nevertheless, wouldn't it be better to use `Requires: %{_bindir}/groff`
> > instead?
> 
> I changed it to /usr/bin/groff. I think this is not going to be used as a
> library
> much, and breaking the commandline use would be annoying. (I didn't use a
> macro
> in the build requires, because if this package was rebuilt with a different
> %_bindir, e.g. for a flatpak, we'd still want the original location for
> groff.)

While I understand the Flatpak argument, I don't think it is valid.

1) It is not reflected in guidelines, so if you feel strong about it, the
guidelines should be updated.
2) It should be resolved on RPM level and there is already discussion:

https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/issues/721


> .spec and .src.rpm updated in place.

Other that that, I don't have any serious concerns => APPROVED


-- 
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
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux