Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-macaddr - Cross platform mac address determination for Ruby
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=642592
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-macaddr - Cross platform mac address determination for Ruby Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: mfojtik@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Target Release: ---
Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-macaddr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-macaddr-1.0.0-1.fc13.src.rpm Description:
Cross platform mac address determination for Ruby.
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=642592
Michal Fojtik mfojtik@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |642601
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=642592
Jozef Zigmund jzigmund@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jzigmund@redhat.com Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #1 from Jozef Zigmund jzigmund@redhat.com 2010-10-13 08:46:34 EDT --- I will take this review.
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=642592
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |jzigmund@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=642592
Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |NEW AssignedTo|jzigmund@redhat.com |nobody@fedoraproject.org
--- Comment #2 from Mamoru Tasaka mtasaka@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp 2010-10-13 14:19:28 EDT --- (Once reverting the previous change)
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=642592
--- Comment #3 from Jozef Zigmund jzigmund@redhat.com 2010-10-26 12:59:50 EDT --- This review it's just NONFORMAL because i'm not in Fedora Packager Group right now.
rpmlint rubygem-macaddr-1.0.0-1.fc13.src.rpm rubygem-macaddr.src: W: no-buildroot-tag rubygem-macaddr.src:35: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 35, tab: line 16) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[BAD - in spec-file at line 15 is empty row and at line 16 is abundant tab character]
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
License: GPLv2+ or Ruby
[OK? - gem doesn't contain LICENSE]
Each Ruby package MUST indicate the Ruby ABI version it depends on with a line like: Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8
[OK - this MUST condition is written via macro in this spec file]
Packages that contain Ruby Gems MUST be called rubygem-%{gemname} where gemname is the name from the Gem's specification.
%global gemname macaddr Name: rubygem-%{gemname}
[OK]
The Source of the package MUST be the full URL to the released Gem archive
URL: http://codeforpeople.com/lib/ruby/macaddr/ Source0: http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/%%7Bgemname%7D-%%7Bversion%7D.gem
[OK]
The version of the package MUST be the Gem's version
Version: 1.0.0
[OK]
The package MUST have a Requires and a BuildRequires on rubygems
%global rubyabi 1.8
Requires: ruby(abi) = %{rubyabi} Requires: rubygems >= 0 Requires: ruby >= 0 BuildRequires: rubygems >= 0 BuildRequires: ruby >= 0
[BAD - need remove tab character at line 16, and checking againt zero version is not needed]
The Gem MUST be installed into %{gemdir} defined as: %global gemdir %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir' 2>/dev/null)
[OK]
If the Gem only contains pure Ruby code, it MUST be marked as BuildArch: noarch
[OK]
The package MUST own the following files and directories:
%{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ %{gemdir}/cache/%{gemname}-%{version}.gem %{gemdir}/specifications/%{gemname}-%{version}.gemspec
[OK? - it doesn't contain directory gems, but i think that in this case it isn't necessary]
The install SHOULD be performed with the command
gem install --local --install-dir %{buildroot}%{gemdir} --force %{SOURCE0}
[OK]
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=642592
--- Comment #4 from Jozef Zigmund jzigmund@redhat.com 2010-10-26 13:36:11 EDT --- (In reply to comment #3)
This review it's just NONFORMAL because i'm not in Fedora Packager Group right now.
rpmlint rubygem-macaddr-1.0.0-1.fc13.src.rpm rubygem-macaddr.src: W: no-buildroot-tag rubygem-macaddr.src:35: W: mixed-use-of-spaces-and-tabs (spaces: line 35, tab: line 16) 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
[BAD - in spec-file at line 15 is empty row and at line 16 is abundant tab character]
MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual license.
License: GPLv2+ or Ruby
[OK? - gem doesn't contain LICENSE]
Each Ruby package MUST indicate the Ruby ABI version it depends on with a line like: Requires: ruby(abi) = 1.8
[OK - this MUST condition is written via macro in this spec file]
Packages that contain Ruby Gems MUST be called rubygem-%{gemname} where gemname is the name from the Gem's specification.
%global gemname macaddr Name: rubygem-%{gemname}
[OK]
The Source of the package MUST be the full URL to the released Gem archive
URL: http://codeforpeople.com/lib/ruby/macaddr/ Source0: http://gems.rubyforge.org/gems/%%7Bgemname%7D-%%7Bversion%7D.gem
[OK]
The version of the package MUST be the Gem's version
Version: 1.0.0
[OK]
The package MUST have a Requires and a BuildRequires on rubygems
%global rubyabi 1.8
Requires: ruby(abi) = %{rubyabi} Requires: rubygems >= 0 Requires: ruby >= 0 BuildRequires: rubygems >= 0 BuildRequires: ruby >= 0
[BAD - need remove tab character at line 16, and checking againt zero version is not needed]
The Gem MUST be installed into %{gemdir} defined as: %global gemdir %(ruby -rubygems -e 'puts Gem::dir' 2>/dev/null)
[OK]
If the Gem only contains pure Ruby code, it MUST be marked as BuildArch: noarch
[OK]
The package MUST own the following files and directories:
%{gemdir}/gems/%{gemname}-%{version}/ %{gemdir}/cache/%{gemname}-%{version}.gem %{gemdir}/specifications/%{gemname}-%{version}.gemspec
[OK? - it doesn't contain directory gems, but i think that in this case it isn't necessary]
The install SHOULD be performed with the command
gem install --local --install-dir %{buildroot}%{gemdir} --force %{SOURCE0}
[OK]
Please check this review also someone else (the best, who is sponsor)
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=642592
Marek Mahut mmahut@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |mmahut@redhat.com AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mmahut@redhat.com
--- Comment #5 from Marek Mahut mmahut@redhat.com 2010-11-04 05:38:32 EDT --- Michal, please update the spec with a correct licence.
https://github.com/btakita/rr/blob/master/LICENSE
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=642592
--- Comment #6 from Michal Fojtik mfojtik@redhat.com 2010-11-04 08:16:59 EDT --- Good catch, thanks. Updated files:
Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr-1.0.0-3.fc14.noarch.rpm
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=642592
Jozef Zigmund jzigmund@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|mmahut@redhat.com |jzigmund@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=642592
--- Comment #7 from Jozef Zigmund jzigmund@redhat.com 2010-11-05 09:55:20 EDT --- (In reply to comment #6)
Good catch, thanks. Updated files:
Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr-1.0.0-3.fc14.noarch.rpm
This Spec and SRPM aren't for this gem. It should be in rubygem-rr. Please load the right ones.
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=642592
--- Comment #8 from Michal Fojtik mfojtik@redhat.com 2010-11-08 09:55:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #7)
(In reply to comment #6)
Good catch, thanks. Updated files:
Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr-1.0.0-3.fc14.noarch.rpm
This Spec and SRPM aren't for this gem. It should be in rubygem-rr. Please load the right ones.
Sorry for that:
Spec URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr.spec SRPM URL: http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-rr-1.0.0-3.fc14.src.rpm
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=642592
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |vondruch@redhat.com
--- Comment #9 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-03-17 10:47:43 EDT --- Could you provide updates spec file please?
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=642592
--- Comment #10 from Michal Fojtik mfojtik@redhat.com 2011-03-18 09:55:24 EDT --- (In reply to comment #9)
Could you provide updates spec file please?
I hope this one will be correct finally:
http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-macaddr.spec http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-macaddr-1.0.0-1.fc13.src.rpm
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=642592
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AssignedTo|jzigmund@redhat.com |vondruch@redhat.com
--- Comment #11 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-03-18 10:01:47 EDT --- I am taking this for review after Jozef.
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=642592
--- Comment #12 from Michal Fojtik mfojtik@redhat.com 2011-03-29 07:07:02 EDT --- rev-2:
http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-macaddr.spec http://mifo.sk/RPMS/rubygem-macaddr-1.0.0-2.fc13.src.rpm
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=642592
--- Comment #13 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-04-04 09:35:59 EDT --- * License - according to macaddr rubyforge home page (http://rubyforge.org/projects/codeforpeople/) the gem is licensed just under Ruby license. - You should encourage upstream to add license file: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
* Cleaning - "rm -rf %{buildroot}" at the top of %install, %clean section are no longer needed: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#.25clean
* Splitting out document files - Please consider to create -doc subpackage and move the %{gemdir}/doc/%{gemname}-%{version} directories into -doc
* Rpmlint - incoherent-version-in-changelog 1.0.0-1 ['1.0.0-2.fc15', '1.0.0-2'] - Please fix the revision in changelog.
Koji build looks fine: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2971863
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=642592
--- Comment #14 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-05-24 06:48:14 EDT --- Ping? Any update here?
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=642592
--- Comment #15 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-07-20 06:45:31 EDT --- Ping?
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org