[Bug 743007] Review Request: rubygem-introspection - Dynamic inspection of the hierarchy of method definitions on a Ruby object

[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=743007

--- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch <vondruch at redhat.com> 2011-10-04 04:27:43 EDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> * %{geminstdir}/README.md should be marked as %doc.

Moved into -doc subpackage and marked as %doc

> * The way you run tests doesn't actually run them (0 tests, 0 assertions, 0
> failures, 0 errors). When you run them this way: 'testrb -Ilib
> ./test/*_test.rb', you can discover, that you need to include BR:
> rubygem(metaclass) and BR: rubygem(builder) (the second one to satisfy the
> require 'blankslate' in snapshot_test.rb). Please clarify these BRs.

Good catch!

> * Consider including license file from the upstream in the package (maybe as a
> separate source).

I'll include the license file as soon as it will be available in official
release. In the meantime, I have added comment into the .spec file. It is not
hard requirement, so it should not be blocker.

> * Could you explain if there currently is a particular reason for R:
> rubygem-metaclass < 0.1?

It follows the upstream suggested dependency, i.e. the original ~> 0.0.1
dependency transform into > 0.0.1 and <= 0.1, see [1]


Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-introspection.spec
SRPM URL:
http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-introspection-0.0.2-3.fcf17.src.rpm



[1] http://docs.rubygems.org/read/chapter/16

-- 
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.