https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2127693
--- Comment #6 from Benson Muite benson_muite@emailplus.org ---
b) Can source1 be linked explicitly, it has a tag https://github.com/hashie/hashie/tags ?
I am following established precedent observed in about 30-ish previously built rubygems. This is explicitly archiving only the spec directory.
Ok.
c) there are font files which should be packaged separately Lato-LightItalic.ttf Lato-RegularItalic.ttf SourceCodePro-Bold.ttf Lato-Light.ttf Lato-Regular.ttf SourceCodePro-Regular.ttf Corresponding packages https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/lato-fonts/lato-fonts/ https://packages.fedoraproject.org/pkgs/adobe-source-code-pro-fonts/adobe-so... Can make these packages dependencies and add softlinks at usr/share/gems/doc/hashie-5.0.0/rdoc/fonts
I am following established precedent observed in about 30-ish previously build rubygems. I have searched the ruby-devel lists[1] and this ticket[2] was mentioned. The consensus was to keep the status quo due to the amount of re-work that would need to be done. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
I expect adding a softlink will work. Build as normal, require the appropriate font packages, remove the bundled ttf files, replace the font files with softlinks. This does not seem like it should be problematic to continue going forward, but let me know if I am wrong. I can reopen the ticket if helpful.
d) Not sure why one still gets the warning [!]: When checking ruby code, install the ruby plugin.
This might be due to fedora-review missing the ruby plugin. You can install fedora-review-plugin-ruby and that should clear the warning.
Thankyou.