Package review request (ruby 1.9 attempt too)

[Vít Ondruch]

Hello stahnma,

Good to see this review. I was thinking about gemification myself, but 
you were faster.

As of timing of this review, the earliest possibility to build in Koji 
will be as soon as we will get the promised tag [1]. We were supposed to 
get it yesterday, but unfortunately it did not happened yet :/

Regarding the spec, of course Bohuslav's notes applies and I had some more:

* One of the biggest changes in packaging guidelines and folder 
structure is the move of binary gem libraries into dedicated folder 
under /usr/lib{,64}. For this purpose, there is "%gem_extdir" macro [2] 
defined in macros.rubygems. So according to the guidelines [3] you 
should replace:

pushd %{buildroot}%{gem_instdir}
ln -s lib/shadow.so .
popd

by

mkdir -p %{buildroot}%{gem_dir}/lib
mv %{buildroot}%{gem_instdir}/lib/shadow.so %{buildroot}%{gem_extdir}/lib

and you need to adjust the %files section appropriately, so change:

%{gem_instdir}/*so

to

%exclude %{gem_instdir}/lib
%dir %{gem_extdir}
%{gem_extdir}/lib


* We have new "%gem_spec" macro, so you should use it:

%{gem_dir}/specifications/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gemspec => %{gem_spec}

* We have new "%gem_docdir" macro:

%doc %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version} => %doc %{gem_docdir}

* I would move %{gem_instdir}/*gemspec into -doc subpackage, since it is 
not runtime dependency.
* I would use %exclude in %files section instead of the "rm", but it's 
more of personal preference.
* You have specified wrong license (at least it differs from the 
original package, I did not checked it further).



BTW, are you aware about Bohuslav's work [4, 5], where he published all 
changes needed for all Ruby 1.9.3 packages, including Puppet?


Vit



[1] https://fedorahosted.org/rel-eng/ticket/5016
[2] 
https://github.com/voxik/ruby.spec/commit/ab15bdaa728f11ea2e9adb570b305ef94372347e
[3] 
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Ruby#RubyGem_with_extension_libraries_written_in_C
[4] 
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2011-December/000729.html
[5] 
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2011-December/000735.html




Dne 17.1.2012 18:30, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
> I'm working on building out Puppet on Ruby 1.9 for my day job at
> Puppet Labs.  I also recently took over ruby-shadow since it was
> orphaned.  Upstream has moved to github and they now only distribute
> as a gem.  So, the package will be renamed to rubygem-ruby-shadow.
>
> I *think* I've follwed the new proposed ruby 1.9 guidelines, but I am
> sure I've missed a couple things.  I'm also curious if there is a way
> I could use the same spec for packages still on Ruby 1.8 (Fedora<  17
> and EL)
>
> Anyway, I'd appreciate Feedback. If it's too early to be attempting
> Ruby 1.9 reviews, that's fine too. :)
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=782560
>
>
> stahnma
> _______________________________________________
> ruby-sig mailing list
> ruby-sig at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig