[Bug 719958] Review Request: rubygem-rack-cache - HTTP Caching for Rack

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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=719958

--- Comment #9 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch at redhat.com> 2011-11-29 03:54:43 EST ---
Thank you for your review.

(In reply to comment #7)
> Well,
> 
> * Description
>   - I think the %description section can be expanded to be
>     more illustrative, as in "README" file or on the URL.

You are right. Upstream was not overly verbose in gem description. I'll take
the first paragraph of the README.

> * Documents
>   - I think "README" should be in the main rpm, because it
>     says "README".

Unfortunately there is no guideline which specifies this. I usually keep README
in the main package only if it is the only source of license information.
However this gem has COPYING file attached, therefore I decided to move
everything into -doc subpackage.

>   - Maybe "CHANGES" can also in the main package

Similarly to above. I personally prefer online documentation, therefore I am
fan of -doc subpackages and deferring as much files as I can into it.

> * "gem" command usage
>   - I prefert to use "gem -V" (verbose mode), however not a blocker

I do consider this flag important only for binary gems. Otherwise it add
unnecessary clutter into the log, which may hide more important things.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.