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-barista - A package for the barista gem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-barista - A package for the barista gem Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: fotios@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: ---
Spec URL: https://github.com/fotioslindiakos/rubygem-barista/raw/master/SPECS/rubygem-...
SRPM URL: https://github.com/fotioslindiakos/rubygem-barista/raw/master/SRPMS/rubygem-...
Description: This gem allows for automated building of Coffeescripts in a rack environment. More information is available here: https://github.com/Sutto/barista. I used gem2rpm and then filled out missing license, contact, and files information.
This is my first package, please be gentle.
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=738465
Fotios Lindiakos fotios@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |177841(FE-NEEDSPONSOR)
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=738465
--- Comment #1 from Fotios Lindiakos fotios@redhat.com 2011-09-14 17:49:19 EDT --- Apologies, but I renamed my Github repo, so these are the new links:
Spec URL: https://raw.github.com/fotioslindiakos/rubygem-all/master/SPECS/rubygem-bari...
SRPM URL: https://raw.github.com/fotioslindiakos/rubygem-all/raw/master/SRPMS/rubygem-...
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=738465
Fotios Lindiakos fotios@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |738721
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=738465
Fotios Lindiakos fotios@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on|738721 |
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=738465
Fotios Lindiakos fotios@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Depends on| |738742
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=738465
Fotios Lindiakos fotios@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |rubygem-barista - A package |rubygem-barista - A package |for the barista gem |for the barista Ruby gem
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Jonas Courteau rpms@courteau.org changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |rpms@courteau.org
--- Comment #2 from Jonas Courteau rpms@courteau.org --- Hi! I can only provide an unofficial review, but here's a few comments:
I'd recommend going over the spec file and bringing it more in line with the guidelines here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby. Specifically, you'll want to have a BuildRequires against rubygems-devel, and use the provided macros (gem_dir,gem_instdir, and so on). There's also new guidelines in there for the %prep/%build/%install sections.
As suggested in those guidelines, you may want to add a %check section. It looks like the gem includes its tests, so: %check pushd .%{gem_instdir} rspec -Ilib spec/ rm -rf spec/ popd should work. (it's also recommended that you don't package the tests unless you need to)
Also, to package on fedora 17 or rawhide, the ruby(abi) requirement needs to be updated to 1.9.1
There's also a bunch of whitespace in front of the changelog entry which should be removed. ---
Hopefully that helps! Once these things are resolved, I'll run through the full review checklist as well.
If anyone is wanting to do other Rubygem-based package reviews, take a look at some of mine - see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=823352 and its dependencies. I still need a sponsor too.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Bug 738465 depends on bug 738742, which changed state.
Bug 738742 Summary: Review Request: rubygem-coffee-script - Ruby CoffeeScript Compiler https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738742
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution|--- |RAWHIDE
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vondruch@redhat.com Summary|Review Request: |Review Request: |rubygem-barista - A package |rubygem-barista - Simple, |for the barista Ruby gem |integrated support for | |CoffeeScript in Rack and | |Rails applications
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(fotios@redhat.com | |)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda bkabrda@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bkabrda@redhat.com
--- Comment #3 from Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda bkabrda@redhat.com --- It seems that Fotios has been unresponsive for quite some time now. If anyone needs this gem, please fix the spec and srpm (see Comment 2) and take it over, I will review it if needed.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Harish Ved ved.harish3@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ved.harish3@gmail.com
--- Comment #4 from Harish Ved ved.harish3@gmail.com --- Updated SPEC URL : https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/blob/master/SPECS/rubygem-barista....
Updated SRPM URL : https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/blob/master/SRPMS/rubygem-barista-...
The tests under spec/ folder are not packaged. This is my first package too, so it might need extensive reviewing.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
--- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com --- Hi Harish,
(In reply to comment #4)
The tests under spec/ folder are not packaged.
Please consider to run the test suite. You can find help in Ruby guidelines [1].
Also, please fix the gem to be compatible with Rawhide guidelines. You can use gem2rpm (from RubyGems.org, the packaged gem2rpm is a bit older version :/) or this [2] migration script.
Thank you.
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Test_suites_not_included_in_th... [2] https://github.com/voxik/fermig/blob/master/f19.rb
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Harish Ved ved.harish3@gmail.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?
--- Comment #6 from Harish Ved ved.harish3@gmail.com --- The links have again been updated for fedora 19 and the tests are run.
Updated SPEC URL : https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/blob/master/SPECS/rubygem-barista....
Updated SRPM URL : https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/blob/master/SRPMS/rubygem-barista-...
Please review.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(fotios@redhat.com | |) | Flags|needinfo? |
--- Comment #7 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com --- (In reply to comment #6) It does not look like f19 .spec file. Could you please use recent gem2rpm and possibly with "-t fedora-19-rawhide" option, which will use the appropriate template.
BTW I would suggest to unpack the test suite in %check section. In that case, you will not need to include it in resulting package.
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags| |needinfo?(fotios@redhat.com | |)
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
--- Comment #8 from Harish Ved ved.harish3@gmail.com --- The links have again been updated. Please review.
Updated SPEC URL : https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/blob/master/SPECS/rubygem-barista....
Updated SRPM URL : https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/blob/master/SRPMS/rubygem-barista-...
Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
--- Comment #9 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com --- Thanks for the update.
* LICENSE file must be included in the main package. - See [1] for more information
* Include test suite as a SOURCE - I am afraid, that build of your package fails on Koji. You cannot donwload/checkout anything from the internet. Please follow the guidelines, which gives example how to properly include test suite [2]
* Run the test suite from .%{gem_instdir} - If you run the test suite from .%{gem_instdir}, you will save some hassle with moving and deleting the test suite.
* Move into -doc subpackage non-essential files
%{gem_instdir}/DESCRIPTION %{gem_instdir}/Gemfile %{gem_instdir}/Gemfile.lock %{gem_instdir}/Rakefile %{gem_instdir}/barista.gemspec
- The files above should do to -doc subpackage, since they are not needed for runtime.
* Exclude the hidden files
%{gem_instdir}/.document %{gem_instdir}/.rspec %{gem_instdir}/.rvmrc.example
- The above files should be exclude (I guess rpmlint would warn about them). I suggest to use "%exclude %{gem_instdir}/.*" to exclude them all in once.
* The package is not buildable - Apparently, you are not BR: git, which you are using later. But since you are going to redo the %check section it should not be issue, just something to be aware. - In the future, please use mock [3] for local testing or Koji [4] (which is for bonus points ;)
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Test_suites_not_included_in_th... [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Mock_to_test_package_builds [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Join_the_package_collection_maintainers#Creat...
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
--- Comment #10 from Harish Ved ved.harish3@gmail.com --- Spec URL: https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/raw/master/SPECS/rubygem-barista.s...
SRPM URL: https://github.com/vedharish/rubygem-gems/raw/master/SRPMS/rubygem-barista-1...
Koji build report: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=5550470
Description: This gem allows for automated building of Coffeescripts in a rack environment. More information is available here: https://github.com/Sutto/barista.
Fedora Account System Username: something
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Assignee|nobody@fedoraproject.org |vondruch@redhat.com Flags|needinfo?(fotios@redhat.com |fedora-review? |) |
--- Comment #11 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com --- * Upstream source differs from the one in SRPM - It seems that the source .gem you have in your SRPM does not match the upstream on. Could you please fix this issue?
* LICENSE file must be included in the main package. - This does not seems to be resolved. - See [1] for more information
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED CC| |msuchy@redhat.com Resolution|--- |DEFERRED Last Closed| |2015-07-21 09:16:16
--- Comment #13 from Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com --- Closing due long inactivity. And based on #12 it does not seem this review will continue.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=738465
Miroslav Suchý msuchy@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks|177841 (FE-NEEDSPONSOR) |201449 (FE-DEADREVIEW)
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=177841 [Bug 177841] Tracker: Review requests from new Fedora packagers who need a sponsor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=201449 [Bug 201449] FE-DEADREVIEW -- Reviews stalled due to lack of submitter response should be blocking this bug.
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org