gem packages including vendorlized external gems

Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka at ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp
Mon Sep 13 18:28:10 UTC 2010


Hello, all:

As written on Fedora "general" packaging guideline [1], and as
kanarip explained on this mailing list, generally we do not allow
to use gems including vendorized external gems.

Now as I saw a review request based on a rubygem containing vendorlized
external gems [3], I searched for rubygem based rpms on Fedora rawhide
containing vendorlized gems and actually we already ships such ones:


Owner           srpm                                          bin_rpm        

kanarip         rubygem-picnic-0.8.1-2.fc12                   rubygem-picnic 
kanarip         rubygem-shoulda-2.11.3-1.fc15                 rubygem-shoulda-doc
mmorsi          rubygem-actionmailer-2.3.8-1.fc15             rubygem-actionmailer
mmorsi          rubygem-actionpack-2.3.8-2.fc15               rubygem-actionpack
mmorsi          rubygem-activesupport-2.3.8-2.fc15            rubygem-activesupport
mmorsi          rubygem-compass-0.8.17-3.fc14                 rubygem-compass
mtasaka         rubygem-activeldap-1.2.1-1.fc13               rubygem-activeldap
mtasaka         rubygem-gettext_activerecord-2.1.0-1.fc13     rubygem-gettext_activerecord-doc
mtasaka         rubygem-gettext_rails-2.1.0-3.fc14            rubygem-gettext_rails-doc

( I have 3....)
For example, activesupport 2.3.8 contains builder-2.1.2, i18n-0.3.7, memcache-client-1.7.4,
tzinfo-0.3.12. All of them should be packaged separately and activesupport should depend
on such separately packaged rubygem related packages.

Unless there are some opinions that this kind of bundling external projects should
be allowed, I will file bugs for these packages on RH bugzilla (and also I have to
fix such bugs) Note that I guess this kind of bundling external projects should also 
require FESCO's approval anyway.

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Bundling_of_multiple_projects
[2] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2010-June/000197.html
[3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=633089

Regards,
Mamoru


More information about the ruby-sig mailing list