Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-test-spec - Behaviour Driven Development interface for Test::Unit
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-test-spec - Behaviour Driven Development interface for Test::Unit Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: low Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: lkundrak@v3.sk QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-test-spec.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-test-spec-0.10.0-1.fc11....
Description:
Test/spec layers an RSpec-inspired interface on top of Test::Unit, so you can mix TDD and BDD (Behavior-Driven Development). It is a clean-room implementation that maps most kinds of Test::Unit assertions to a should-like syntax.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Michal Ingeli mi@v3.sk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |mi@v3.sk Flag| |fedora-review?
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
--- Comment #1 from Michal Ingeli mi@v3.sk 2009-06-28 08:52:47 EDT --- * naming ok * spec file clean, american english * file lists ok, examples in documentation * builds in mock * rpmlint silent * source matches upstream
work to do: - package is distributed in the same terms as ruby is. So it should have ruby license or GPLv2. Not GPLv2+. - Consistent build root reference. In %clean stare it's referred to build root as %{buildroot} and other stages uses $RPM_BUILD_ROOT. - add BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 (maybe should be checked by rpmlint)
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Michal Ingeli mi@v3.sk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mi@v3.sk
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
--- Comment #2 from Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk 2009-07-08 13:01:09 EDT --- (In reply to comment #1)
work to do:
- package is distributed in the same terms as ruby is. So it should have ruby
license or GPLv2. Not GPLv2+.
Good catch. Fixed.
- Consistent build root reference. In %clean stare it's referred to build root
as %{buildroot} and other stages uses $RPM_BUILD_ROOT.
Fixed.
- add BuildRequires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 (maybe should be checked by rpmlint)
bug #510313
SPEC: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SPECS/rubygem-test-spec.spec SRPM: http://v3.sk/~lkundrak/gdc-ruby-stack/SRPMS/rubygem-test-spec-0.10.0-2.fc11....
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
--- Comment #3 from Michal Ingeli mi@v3.sk 2009-07-13 07:54:43 EDT --- All work done, looks good.
APPROVED
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #4 from Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk 2009-07-13 08:24:08 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-test-spec Short Description: Behaviour Driven Development interface for Test::Unit Owners: lkundrak Branches: F-11 EL-5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Michal Ingeli mi@v3.sk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #5 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-07-14 00:48:52 EDT --- cvs done.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NEXTRELEASE
--- Comment #6 from Lubomir Rintel lkundrak@v3.sk 2009-07-31 02:11:51 EDT --- Thanks for the review and CVS. Imported and build.
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=508453
Michael Stahnke mastahnke@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mastahnke@gmail.com
--- Comment #7 from Michael Stahnke mastahnke@gmail.com 2010-04-16 18:15:24 EDT --- Is there a reason this was built for EPEL5 but never put in as an update? If you would like a co-maintainer in EPEL, I'd be happy to do it.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org