https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1114146
--- Comment #3 from Julian C. Dunn jdunn@aquezada.com --- (In reply to Vít Ondruch from comment #2)
- Patches are missing comments
- Your .spec file contains 4 patches. It would be nice to comment them what they are good for, why they are not upstream. For example, Patch3 seems
to be fixing compatibility with RSpec 2.x, while upstream is using RSpec 3.x already.
- libyaml2 gem dependency
- I have to say, I am disappointed with this way of bundling, although not sure if you can do something about it, since this is upstream issue, but
I must point this out.
I'd call your patches substantial. The biggest change is that you
completely drop the dependency on libyajl2, that means if somebody is sharing Gemfile.lock (and we can put aside if this is good idea or not), their dependencies will differ for Fedoras version of ffi-libyaml in comparison to original gems.
So I have already had this discussion with upstream. The vendoring (or not) of the C library is all within the separate libyajl2 gem, to abstract that away. I can separately package that gem as rubygem-libyajl2 with the vendoring turned off (it's supported by upstream) instead of doing it the way I have done; would that be acceptable, to maintain the existing dependency tree?
The only reason I did it this way is because at this point the rubygem-libyajl2 package becomes a complete no-op and is only used to satisfy gem deps.