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-rufus-scheduler - Scheduler for Ruby (at, cron and every jobs)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=472819
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rufus-scheduler - Scheduler for Ruby (at, cron and every jobs) Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: dpierce@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora
Spec URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rufus-scheduler.spec SRPM URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rubygem-rufus-scheduler-1.0.11-1.fc10.src.r... Description: Scheduler for Ruby (at, cron and every jobs), formerly known as 'openwferu-scheduler'
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=472819
--- Comment #1 from Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com 2008-12-01 10:46:28 EDT --- Follow up to the request. It's been over a week without any response to my review request.
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=472819
--- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts tibbs@math.uh.edu 2008-12-02 15:07:01 EDT --- I hope you realize that there are over 700 review requests in the queue, and that while they will all receive attention eventually, one week including a major US holiday is a bit of an ask.
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=472819
--- Comment #3 from Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com 2008-12-18 10:50:03 EDT --- New version of the GEM was released today, so the SRPM and spec are updated now:
Spec URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rufus-scheduler.spec SRPM URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rufus-scheduler-1.0.12-1.fc10....
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=472819
--- Comment #4 from Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com 2009-02-02 09:14:09 EDT --- New version of the gem was released today, so the SRPM and spec have been updated:
Spec URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rufus-scheduler.spec SRPM URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rufus-scheduler-1.0.13-1.fc10....
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=472819
Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |476530
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=472819
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |jussi.lehtola@iki.fi AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 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=472819
--- Comment #5 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2009-04-29 15:08:50 EDT --- - I don't know if this is normal for ruby gems, but you're using a non-standard documentation location:
%doc %{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version} %doc %{geminstdir}/README.txt %doc %{geminstdir}/CHANGELOG.txt %doc %{geminstdir}/CREDITS.txt
Please fix this, for example by adding %setup -c -T
and after the install:
mkdir doc/ mv %{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version} %{geminstdir}/README.txt \ %{geminstdir}/CHANGELOG.txt %{geminstdir}/CREDITS.txt doc/
Then your %doc section should be just %doc doc/*
- The line Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 is missing. Please add this. [ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines ]
- You can probably drop the %define ruby_sitelib %(ruby -rrbconfig -e "puts Config::CONFIG['sitelibdir']") since you're not using it anywhere. ---
rpmlint output is clean.
MUST: The package does not yet exist in Fedora. The Review Request is not a duplicate. OK MUST: The spec file for the package is legible and macros are used consistently. OK MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. OK MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}. OK MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and meet the Licensing Guidelines. OK MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license. OK MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. OK MUST: The package MUST successfully compile and build into binary rpms. OK MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. OK MUST: Clean section exists. OK MUST: Large documentation files must go in a -doc subpackage. OK MUST: All relevant items are included in %doc. Items in %doc do not affect runtime of application. OK MUST: No file conflicts with other packages and no general names. OK MUST: Buildroot cleaned before install. OK SHOULD: %{?dist} tag is used in release. OK
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. NEEDSFIX
SHOULD: The package builds in mock. OK
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=472819
--- Comment #6 from Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com 2009-04-29 16:19:55 EDT --- (In reply to comment #5)
- I don't know if this is normal for ruby gems, but you're using a non-standard
documentation location:
That's a standard location for Ruby gems:
(mcpierce@mcpierce-laptop:~)$ ls /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/doc/ actionmailer-2.1.1 activeresource-2.1.1 daemons-1.0.7 gruff-0.3.4 rake-0.8.4 rufus-scheduler-1.0.13 actionpack-2.1.1 activesupport-2.1.1 fastthread-1.0.1 hoe-1.12.1 RedCloth-4.1.9 tlsmail-0.0.1 activerecord-2.1.1 cgi_multipart_eof_fix-2.3 gem_plugin-0.2.3 mongrel-1.0.1 rubyforge-1.0.3
Maybe the Ruby packaging guidelines should add a guideline for this?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Build_Architecture_and_File_Pla...
- The line
Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8 is missing. Please add this. [ http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Ruby_Packaging_Guidelines ]
Fixed.
- You can probably drop the
%define ruby_sitelib %(ruby -rrbconfig -e "puts Config::CONFIG['sitelibdir']") since you're not using it anywhere.
Removed.
SHOULD: If the package does not include license text(s) as separate files from upstream, the packager should query upstream to include it. NEEDSFIX
Fixed. LICENSE.txt is in the RPM but I didn't note it as a doc.
Spec URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rufus-scheduler.spec SRPM URL: http://mcpierce.fedorapeople.org/rpms/rubygem-rufus-scheduler-1.0.13-2.fc10....
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=472819
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
--- Comment #7 from Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi 2009-04-29 17:01:33 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6)
(In reply to comment #5)
- I don't know if this is normal for ruby gems, but you're using a non-standard
documentation location:
That's a standard location for Ruby gems:
OK, in that case.
Maybe the Ruby packaging guidelines should add a guideline for this?
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Ruby#Build_Architecture_and_File_Pla...
Indeed.
**
The package has been
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=472819
Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #8 from Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com 2009-04-29 20:45:41 EDT --- New Package CVS Request ======================= Package Name: rubygem-rufus-scheduler Short Description: Scheduler for Ruby Owners: mcpierce Branches: F-10 F-11 EL-5 InitialCC:
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=472819
Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+
--- Comment #9 from Kevin Fenzi kevin@tummy.com 2009-04-30 00:41:08 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=472819
Darryl L. Pierce dpierce@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |NOTABUG
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=472819
Jussi Lehtola jussi.lehtola@iki.fi changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|NOTABUG |CURRENTRELEASE
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org