Review swaps

[Darryl L. Pierce]

I've got two Ruby gems up for package review, and would like to do a
swap with someone (or two someones) to get them through:

Review Request: rubygem-qpid_proton - Ruby language bindings for the Qpid Proton messaging framework
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906843

Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 25.2.2013 15:35, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a):
> I've got two Ruby gems up for package review, and would like to do a
> swap with someone (or two someones) to get them through:
>
> Review Request: rubygem-qpid_proton - Ruby language bindings for the Qpid Proton messaging framework
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906843
>
> Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331

Hi Darryl,

Not that I am going to take the review, I just want to point out that 
for F19, there was updated new packaging guidelines. It would be cool if 
you can update the packages appropriately. Thank you.

Vít

[Darryl L. Pierce]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 03:39:39PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 25.2.2013 15:35, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a):
> > I've got two Ruby gems up for package review, and would like to do a
> > swap with someone (or two someones) to get them through:
> >
> > Review Request: rubygem-qpid_proton - Ruby language bindings for the Qpid Proton messaging framework
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906843
> >
> > Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331
>
> Hi Darryl,
>
> Not that I am going to take the review, I just want to point out
> that for F19, there was updated new packaging guidelines. It would
> be cool if you can update the packages appropriately. Thank you.

Hrm, I've modified the spec for rubygem-qpid_proton and it just fails
on:

%global rubyabi 1.9.1

BuildRequires: ruby(release) >= %{rubyabi}

with:

mcpierce@mcpierce-laptop:rubygem-qpid_proton (master) $ rpmbuild -ba --rebuild rubygem-qpid_proton.spec 
error: Failed build dependencies:
    ruby(release) >= 1.9.1 is needed by rubygem-qpid_proton-0.3-1.1.fc18.x86_64

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 25.2.2013 19:34, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a):
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 03:39:39PM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Dne 25.2.2013 15:35, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a):
> > > I've got two Ruby gems up for package review, and would like to do a
> > > swap with someone (or two someones) to get them through:
> > >
> > > Review Request: rubygem-qpid_proton - Ruby language bindings for the Qpid Proton messaging framework
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906843
> > >
> > > Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
> > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331
> >
> > Hi Darryl,
> >
> > Not that I am going to take the review, I just want to point out
> > that for F19, there was updated new packaging guidelines. It would
> > be cool if you can update the packages appropriately. Thank you.
>
> Hrm, I've modified the spec for rubygem-qpid_proton and it just fails
> on:
>
> %global rubyabi 1.9.1
>
> BuildRequires: ruby(release) >= %{rubyabi}
>
> with:
>
> mcpierce@mcpierce-laptop:rubygem-qpid_proton (master) $ rpmbuild -ba --rebuild rubygem-qpid_proton.spec
> error: Failed build dependencies:
>    ruby(release) >= 1.9.1 is needed by rubygem-qpid_proton-0.3-1.1.fc18.x86_64

Yes, you need to use f19-ruby tag for build. However, the dependencies 
there might not be satisfied. So you can help with rebuild first ;) At 
least with your gems. That would definitely help.

Thank you.

BTW, the ruby(release) should be unversioned, unless there is special need.

Vít

[Darryl L. Pierce]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 09:38:38AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Hrm, I've modified the spec for rubygem-qpid_proton and it just fails
> > on:
> >
> > %global rubyabi 1.9.1
> >
> > BuildRequires: ruby(release) >= %{rubyabi}
> >
> > with:
> >
> > mcpierce@mcpierce-laptop:rubygem-qpid_proton (master) $ rpmbuild -ba --rebuild rubygem-qpid_proton.spec
> > error: Failed build dependencies:
> >    ruby(release) >= 1.9.1 is needed by rubygem-qpid_proton-0.3-1.1.fc18.x86_64
>
> Yes, you need to use f19-ruby tag for build. However, the
> dependencies there might not be satisfied. So you can help with
> rebuild first ;) At least with your gems. That would definitely
> help.

"At least with [my] gems"?
> Thank you.
>
> BTW, the ruby(release) should be unversioned, unless there is special need.

KK - missed that in the guidelines.

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 26.2.2013 14:00, Darryl L. Pierce napsal(a):
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 09:38:38AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> > Yes, you need to use f19-ruby tag for build. However, the
> > dependencies there might not be satisfied. So you can help with
> > rebuild first ;) At least with your gems. That would definitely
> > help.
>
> "At least with [my] gems"?

Yes, there is more than 400 gems which needs to get updated for F19, 
Ruby 2.0.0 and it would be best to do it prior F19 branch. You have 
commit bits to at least a few of them [1] and if you provide updated [2] 
and tested srpm of every other gem you might get a chance to convert, I 
can build them.

Thank you

Vít

[1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/users/packages/mcpierce
[2] 
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2013-February/001240.html

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Hello, Darryl:

Darryl L. Pierce wrote, at 02/25/2013 11:35 PM +9:00:
> I've got two Ruby gems up for package review, and would like to do a
> swap with someone (or two someones) to get them through:
>
> Review Request: rubygem-qpid_proton - Ruby language bindings for the Qpid Proton messaging framework
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906843
>
> Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331

Well, I still have 7 rubygems-related review requests waiting
for reviewers, so please take them. I will check your two reviews
(tomorrow: I take a rest now).

rubygem-net-http-digest_auth
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892313

rubygem-unf_ext
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892314

rubygem-webrobots
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892315

rubygem-unf - depends on rubygem-unf_ext
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904639

rubygem-domain_name - depends on rubygem-unf
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640

rubygem-gdk3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912960

rubygem-gtk3
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912961

Also I would appreciate review swaps with other people
interested.

Regards,
Mamoru

[Darryl L. Pierce]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:48:20PM +0900, Mamoru TASAKA wrote:
> Hello, Darryl:
>
> Darryl L. Pierce wrote, at 02/25/2013 11:35 PM +9:00:
> > I've got two Ruby gems up for package review, and would like to do a
> > swap with someone (or two someones) to get them through:
> >
> > Review Request: rubygem-qpid_proton - Ruby language bindings for the Qpid Proton messaging framework
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=906843
> >
> > Review Request: rubygem-rubeyond - A development framework for Ruby
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=915331
>
> Well, I still have 7 rubygems-related review requests waiting
> for reviewers, so please take them. I will check your two reviews
> (tomorrow: I take a rest now).
>
> rubygem-net-http-digest_auth
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892313

Reviewed and approved with one change request.
> rubygem-unf_ext
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892314
>
> rubygem-webrobots
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=892315

Reviewed and approved with two change requests.
> rubygem-unf - depends on rubygem-unf_ext
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904639
>
> rubygem-domain_name - depends on rubygem-unf
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=904640
>
> rubygem-gdk3
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912960
>
> rubygem-gtk3
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=912961
>
> Also I would appreciate review swaps with other people
> interested.
>
> Regards,
> Mamoru
>
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig