Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ruby-hpricot - A Fast, Enjoyable HTML Parser for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=364211 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-11-05 16:32 EST ------- I had to reacquaint myself with the Ruby guidelines.... One question: This is also available as a gem. If something ends up needing the gem, you'll have to abandon this package and submit rubygem-hpricot for review. So it's worth asking: are you sure that nothing will want this as a gem, and if not then wouldn't it be easier to do it all at once? Regardless, I'll go ahead and review this; a gem package shouldn't be much different. I note there's an hpricot-0.6 tarball on the upstream web site, but I don't know if you'd want to use it. This package looks fine, save for one thing. The guidelines spefically state that you need RuildRequires: ruby. Currently ruby is only being brought in for this build because rake has a dependency on /usr/bin/ruby. I honestly don't know if this is a real issue. Review: * source files match upstream: efbb70d4ee6b79a3cbf7dac24f16646c3ab688812cc2f68ffcf6d3e76e826ec4 hpricot-0.5.150.tgz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * compiler flags are appropriate. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly * debuginfo package looks complete. * rpmlint is silent. * final provides and requires are sane: hpricot_scan.so()(64bit) ruby(hpricot) = 0.5.150-2.fc8 ruby-hpricot = 0.5.150-2.fc8 = libpthread.so.0()(64bit) libruby.so.1.8()(64bit) ruby(abi) = 1.8 * %check is present and all tests pass: .............................................................. Finished in 6.535526 seconds. (rake test isn't very verbose about successes) * no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * no scriptlets present. * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. * no headers. * no pkgconfig files. * no static libraries. * no libtool .la files. ? ruby not required * .rb files stored in sitelib. * arch specific files stroed in sitearch * ruby(name) provided * ruby(abi) required. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review