Policy re Gems that don't have RPMs yet?

[Mo Morsi]

On 02/26/2013 11:21 AM, Philip Rhoades wrote:
> People,
>
> Thanks to the people who responded - see inline comments:
>
>
> On 2013-02-26 21:14, Nathan Wan wrote:
>> I'm no expert here but I'd like to add my two cents.
>>
>> http://isitfedoraruby.com [3] is a project started last summer. It is
>> intended to give an overview of the progress of gem->rpm conversions
>> on fedora.
>
>
> Nice site!
>
>
>> We used to have a section called Most Wanted Gems whose purpose is
>> exactly to provide a way for people to vote for gems they want, but
>> haven't been converted into rpms yet. Hopefully with more votes,
>> developers will pay more attention to those highly wanted gems.
>>
>> (Well, at least this is what we've planned initially.)
>
>
> That table is still there on the home page but how do I add to it?
>
>
>> Although the website is still pretty much in progress, and
>> unfortunately it only tracks gems with rpms currently (instead of the
>> whole bunch from rubygems.org), maybe we will roll out the feature
>> soon if people do find that useful.
>
>
> I think it is a great idea for the whole Gem=>RPM project.
>
> I don't have an immediate need for "devise" at the moment but I'm sure
> I will have the need in a few months time - I will attempt the
> conversion process (maybe on a simple gem first?) after I have moved
> house in a month or so - but the process does look cumbersome - maybe
> it is not as bad as it looks?
>
> Regards,
>
> Phil.

Yes I'd personally love to see this happen. Stuff like automating the
conversion on a gem being published, setting up hosted yum repos, and
deeper gem inspection so as to pull the maximum that we can from a gem
package. It's a tricky project but is sorely needed / would be well used.

If you need any help getting started w/ the isitfedoraruby codebase just
ask, be sure to also check out gem2rpm. [1]

  -Mo

[1] https://github.com/lutter/gem2rpm/