[Bug 364211] Review Request: ruby-hpricot - A Fast, Enjoyable HTML Parser for Ruby

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

 



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

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