Re: ruby-sig FAS group and rubygems build in Copr

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 21.5.2016 v 04:20 Ken Dreyer napsal(a):
> This sounds interesting, and I'm curious to see how well all the gems
> build compared to the PyPI packages!

I think that there should not be big issues. If you not running tests,
there shouldn't be to much issues. So far there were just small changes
to gem2rpm such as issues with empty URL.

So Ken (since you are the only person who responded so far), what is
your feeling about the ruby-sig FAS group and group ownership of the
packages?

Vít

[1] https://github.com/fedora-ruby/gem2rpm/issues/71
> Ken
>
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > You probably noticed, that there is ongoing build of all Python packages
> > in Copr [1] and today, I was approached by Miroslav Suchý, that he'd
> > like to do the same for rubygems. And this in turn triggered these
> > questions:
> > Would you be interested to create ruby-sig group in FAS? We could
> >
> > make the group owner of some packages and in turn, the members of the
> > group could maintain the packages, without explicitly asking for some ACLs.
> > For the Copr rebuild of rubygems, there needs to be some FAS group
> >
> > again. Python guys are asking for "pypi-builds-sig" group [2], hence
> > following their lead, I'd like to ask for "rubygems-builds-sig" group
> > (note that although I don't like the '-sig' suffix in this case, it is
> > mandated by the infrastructure ticket template).
> >
> > So what are your thoughts?
> >
> > Vít
> >
> > [1]
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]/...
> >
> > [2] https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/5311
> >
> > ruby-sig mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[e-mail]
>
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/[e-mail]