gem2rpm rpm acceptable?

["Guillermo Gómez S."]

Hi there ruby/sig, :)

Im looking to produce a fedora pkg for phusion passenger.
First i tried from ground cero, then i recalled gem2rpm command.
Of ocurse i took the shortcut, now i have an rpm which sources are not 
"pristine" ¿are they? I produced the gem from the pristine source with

rake package:gem

Then

gem2rpm gem-name > new.spec

Is this procedure acceptable for Fedora to produce rpms?

krgds

Guillermo
(btw: im looking for sponsorship to become a fedora packager/maintainer)
------------------------
http://www.neotechgw.com
http://gomix.fedora-ve.org

[Mo Morsi]

On 07/06/2010 05:53 PM, Guillermo Gómez wrote:
> Hi there ruby/sig, :)
>
> Im looking to produce a fedora pkg for phusion passenger.
> First i tried from ground cero, then i recalled gem2rpm command.
> Of ocurse i took the shortcut, now i have an rpm which sources are not
> "pristine" ¿are they? I produced the gem from the pristine source with

Phusion passenger has already been submitted. Unfortunately it doesn't 
look like it's going to make it in unless a critical issue is resolved, 
namely the passenger project forks the boost::thread library which is 
currently not acceptable due to the Fedora guidelines (AFAIK any fork 
has to be its own separate upstream project, and can't simply be rolled 
into another)

See the package submission for more details

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696
> rake package:gem
>
> Then
>
> gem2rpm gem-name>  new.spec
>
> Is this procedure acceptable for Fedora to produce rpms?

Usually we base the packages pushed to Fedora off a official gemcutter 
release. Eg the Source0 uri should be one from rubygems.org

See rubygem-compass for example, or one of many other rubygems in Fedora

http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/rubygem-compass/F-13/rubygem-compas...

(note though since the 'official' rubygems.org repo is relatively new, 
alot of gems in Fedora are still pointing at gems.rubyforge.org or 
gemcutter.org)

This way we are sure we are basing our rpms off a 'stable' release and 
not the latest (potentially unstable) project source head.

Hope this helps, and don't let passenger already being submitted 
discourage you, there are still many more rubygems to be packaged!

-Mo

["Guillermo Gómez S."]

El 06/07/10 20:17, Mohammed Morsi escribió:
> On 07/06/2010 05:53 PM, Guillermo Gómez wrote:
> > Hi there ruby/sig, :)
> >
> > Im looking to produce a fedora pkg for phusion passenger.
> > First i tried from ground cero, then i recalled gem2rpm command.
> > Of ocurse i took the shortcut, now i have an rpm which sources are not
> > "pristine" ¿are they? I produced the gem from the pristine source with
>
> Phusion passenger has already been submitted. Unfortunately it doesn't
> look like it's going to make it in unless a critical issue is resolved,
> namely the passenger project forks the boost::thread library which is
> currently not acceptable due to the Fedora guidelines (AFAIK any fork
> has to be its own separate upstream project, and can't simply be rolled
> into another)
>
> See the package submission for more details
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696
> > rake package:gem
> >
> > Then
> >
> > gem2rpm gem-name> new.spec
> >
> > Is this procedure acceptable for Fedora to produce rpms?
>
> Usually we base the packages pushed to Fedora off a official gemcutter
> release. Eg the Source0 uri should be one from rubygems.org
>
> See rubygem-compass for example, or one of many other rubygems in Fedora
>
> http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/rubygem-compass/F-13/rubygem-compas...
>
> (note though since the 'official' rubygems.org repo is relatively new,
> alot of gems in Fedora are still pointing at gems.rubyforge.org or
> gemcutter.org)
>
> This way we are sure we are basing our rpms off a 'stable' release and
> not the latest (potentially unstable) project source head.
>
> Hope this helps, and don't let passenger already being submitted
> discourage you, there are still many more rubygems to be packaged!

It does Mo, thanks, anyway, can someone point me a desired rubygem, and 
easy one to start with ? (to be packaged, i would like to start a howto 
series of rpm/rubygem and talks in fudcon chile latam jul 15)

It was my fault not looking at bugzilla first, but i was just studying 
and testing.

I have a couple of bugzillas requests pending just in case there's a 
sponsor interested on help me (not ruby related)

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611476
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551857

Guillermo
> -Mo

[Mo Morsi]

On 07/06/2010 10:14 PM, Guillermo Gómez wrote:
> El 06/07/10 20:17, Mohammed Morsi escribió:
> > On 07/06/2010 05:53 PM, Guillermo Gómez wrote:
> > > Hi there ruby/sig, :)
> > >
> > > Im looking to produce a fedora pkg for phusion passenger.
> > > First i tried from ground cero, then i recalled gem2rpm command.
> > > Of ocurse i took the shortcut, now i have an rpm which sources are not
> > > "pristine" ¿are they? I produced the gem from the pristine source with
> >
> > Phusion passenger has already been submitted. Unfortunately it doesn't
> > look like it's going to make it in unless a critical issue is resolved,
> > namely the passenger project forks the boost::thread library which is
> > currently not acceptable due to the Fedora guidelines (AFAIK any fork
> > has to be its own separate upstream project, and can't simply be rolled
> > into another)
> >
> > See the package submission for more details
> >
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=470696
> > > rake package:gem
> > >
> > > Then
> > >
> > > gem2rpm gem-name> new.spec
> > >
> > > Is this procedure acceptable for Fedora to produce rpms?
> >
> > Usually we base the packages pushed to Fedora off a official gemcutter
> > release. Eg the Source0 uri should be one from rubygems.org
> >
> > See rubygem-compass for example, or one of many other rubygems in Fedora
> >
> > http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/rubygem-compass/F-13/rubygem-compas...
> >
> > (note though since the 'official' rubygems.org repo is relatively new,
> > alot of gems in Fedora are still pointing at gems.rubyforge.org or
> > gemcutter.org)
> >
> > This way we are sure we are basing our rpms off a 'stable' release and
> > not the latest (potentially unstable) project source head.
> >
> > Hope this helps, and don't let passenger already being submitted
> > discourage you, there are still many more rubygems to be packaged!
>
> It does Mo, thanks, anyway, can someone point me a desired rubygem, 
> and easy one to start with ? (to be packaged, i would like to start a 
> howto series of rpm/rubygem and talks in fudcon chile latam jul 15)

Feel free to take any rubygem that's not already in fedora and package 
it. You'll often find most development in the community revolves around 
satisfying one's own needs, so feel free to find a gem you often use or 
just like, and create an rpm for it.
> It was my fault not looking at bugzilla first, but i was just studying 
> and testing.
>
> I have a couple of bugzillas requests pending just in case there's a 
> sponsor interested on help me (not ruby related)
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=611476
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=551857
>
> Guillermo

I'm not a sponsor, so I can't help you there, sorry. There are some 
really good tips though on the Fedora wiki

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group

Depending on circumstances, it may or may not take some time to get 
sponsored. Like I said before, don't get discouraged, rather strive to 
show that you understand the FOSS philosophy, are learning and making 
use of the Fedora package guidelines (informal reviews of other people's 
packages are a great way to do this, there are many gems waiting to be 
reviewed), and are working towards the benefit of the community in general.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc...

Hope this helps,
   -Mo