Ruby 2.0
by Vít Ondruch
Hi,
Just for your information, I have pushed ruby-2.0 branch into the Ruby's
git repo. So if you like test the latest Ruby, you need to get the
latest HEAD tarball, which could be prepared using:
$ cd /path/to/your/ruby/sources
$ ./tool/make-snapshot tmp
Note that you have to have available subversion and bison on your
system. Also note that the content of tarball is needed to be repacked,
that the Ruby sources will be stored in "ruby-2.0.0-p0" folder (I know,
it is annoyance, but you can fix the spec and send me a patch ;). Also
note that I currently keep the ruby_abi at 1.9.1, while the official
release will have 2.0.0 probably. This should allow you to use Fedora's
gems without rebuild. Any comments/patches are appreciated.
Vit
[1]
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=ruby.git;a=tree;h=refs/heads/ruby...
10 years, 9 months
Ruby-SIG meeting at FUDCon Paris 2012?
by Vít Ondruch
Hi Rubyists,
Since me and bkabrda are coming to FUDCon Paris, it would be nice
opportunity to meet you, other Rubyists, and discuss some topics and
future directions of Ruby in Fedora. Please let us know who would be
interested to come and share your topics, which should be discussed. I
can throw in several right now:
* JRuby and Rubinius in Fedora and their integration with RubyGems.
* Bundler?
* Rails 3(4) in Fedora.
* Redmine, Passenger?
* Parallel installation of several gem versions.
* gem2rpm improvements
Vit
11 years
is-it-fedora-ruby update
by Mo Morsi
Just a quick update regarding the Fedora/Ruby project Zuhao has been
working on as part of the Google Summer of Code.
As many of you may remember, Zuhao has been working on a rails based
site to highlight the ruby sig's community's effort in packaging ruby
gems, developing ruby software, and overall improving the Ruby
experience on Fedora. Zuhao has made great headway with the project so
far, implementing Rake modules that allows us to pull the gem and rpm
packages into the local db as well as various frontend interfaces which
to display and cross-reference the gem / rpm metadata and other info
[1][2].
Various other features are in progress including the ability to comment
and rate specific packages, a section highlighting various projects
based on the Fedora / Ruby stack, and a mechanism to more closely
integrate w/ rubygems as gems are pushed.
I've hosted the website on one of my servers for the time being and
pointed a subdomain to it [3]. Towards the end of the summer we'll
update the site with the latest developments, reserve the
is-it-fedora-ruby (or other) domain, and point it at the server.
Any comments or feedback would be more than appreciated as well as any
patches or feature requests for the codebase. I'd like to thank Zuhao
for the work so far and am looking forward to seeing the site continue
to develop.
-Mo
[1] http://mo.morsi.org/files/gsoc/isitfedoraruby/02-gem-list.png
[2]
http://mo.morsi.org/files/gsoc/isitfedoraruby/03-packages-by-popularity.png
[3] http://isitfedoraruby.syracloud.net/
[4] https://github.com/zuhao/isitfedoraruby/tree/create-controllers
11 years, 1 month
Cached .gem file - include it or not
by Miroslav Suchý
Hi,
I would like to start discussion, whether packaged rubygems should
include cached gem file.
I'm seeing shift from "should exclude cached .gem file" to "must exclude
cached .gem file". I tried to search archive of this mailing list for
discussion about this, but find none.
While current guidelines does not address this:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#RubyGems
In discussion page:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_talk:Ruby#Cached_.gem_file
is this text:
> The package *should* exclude the cached .gem file in files section:
> %exclude %{gemdir}/cache/%{gemname}-%{version}.gem
>Since the gem is installed using RPM, it makes no sense to include the
>cached .gem file. This file is used typically with 'gem pristine'
>command to restore gem into its original state, but this could be
>achieved by equivalent RPM command.
And in draft:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Ruby
is even:
Since the Gem is installed using RPM, you *must* exclude the .gem file.
And this is even what is in current fedora-review(1) as in its output is:
[x]: MUST Gem package must exclude cached Gem.
I do not understand why it is MUST item. And anyway, why it could not be
present.
I would like to have cached gem in final package. I will tell you why.
I have several collegues, which develop application for Fedora, but they
develop on MacOS.
Usually they download rubygems from rubygems.org. But sometimes Fedora
version of rubygem has patch applied.
In such case when we do:
%prep
gem unpack %{SOURCE0}
%setup -q -D -T -n %{gem_name}-%{version}
gem spec %{SOURCE0} -l --ruby > %{gem_name}.gemspec
%patch0 -p1
%build
...
gem build %{gem_name}.gemspec
the resulting gem file is different (compared to rubygem.org version).
If cached gem file is present in package, they can easily extract it and
use this one - because sometimes the behaviour is different (compared to
rubygem.org version).
And if I correctly understood 'gem pristine' - it will not help here as
it will not create .gem file with those security patches.
So what I would like to see, is to have cached gem present in package.
At list for packages containing patch.
But since people have tendency to forget ("Oh, security problem. Lets
add patch." days/month later: "You forgot to add cached .gem." "Sorry")
- I would suggest to include cached gem always (i.e. MUST item). But I
understood that sometimes it can be very hard to repackage gem, as it
can be old and may miss some required metadata, so I would say it SHOULD
include cached gem.
Opinions?
--
Miroslav Suchy
Red Hat Systems Management Engineering
11 years, 1 month
Gitorious plan
by Ken Dreyer
Hi Ruby SIG,
I'm interested in getting Gitorious into Fedora, and I've outlined the
steps necessary on the wiki [1]. I figured I would throw this out
there for feedback. I'm wondering if anyone see any other things to
consider along with what I've written?
Also, now that rubygem-ruby-net-ldap has been EOL'd in Fedora, does
anyone have a tips or pointers for porting to the net-ldap Gem?
- Ken
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ktdreyer/Gitorious
11 years, 1 month
