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-open4 - open4 is library for management of child processes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=708990
Summary: Review Request: rubygem-open4 - open4 is library for management of child processes Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: nobody@fedoraproject.org ReportedBy: vondruch@redhat.com QAContact: extras-qa@fedoraproject.org CC: notting@redhat.com, fedora-package-review@redhat.com Estimated Hours: 0.0 Classification: Fedora Story Points: ---
Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-open4.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-open4-1.0.1-1.fc16.src.rpm Description: Manage child processes and their IO handles easily
Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3100053gvim
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=708990
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Blocks| |705527
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=708990
Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED AssignedTo|nobody@fedoraproject.org |mmaslano@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=708990
--- Comment #1 from Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano@redhat.com 2011-05-30 08:33:48 EDT --- - rpmlint OK - package must be named according to Guidelines OK - spec file name must match the base package %{name} OK - package must meet the Packaging Guidelines OK - package must be licensed with Fedora approved license ? - license field must match actual license ? - text of the license in its own file must be included in %doc OK - sources must match the upstream source OK - package MUST successfully compile and build OK - architecture listed in ExcludeArch MUST have a bug filed in bugzilla OK - build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires ? - handle locales properly with %find_lang macro OK - shared library files must call ldconfig in %post(un) OK - packages must NOT bundle system libraries OK - package must own all directories that it creates OK - permissions on files must be set properly OK - package must consistently use macros OK - package must contain code, or permissable content OK - large documentation must go in a -doc OK - %doc must not affect the runtime of the application OK - header files must be in a -devel package OK - static libraries must be in a -static package OK - library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a -devel OK - devel package usually require base package OK - packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives OK - GUI applications must include a %{name}.desktop file OK - packages must not own files or directories already owned by other packages OK
Requires: rubygems >= 0 Why must be requires bigger than 0?
Where is Ruby license stated? I didn't find it in package.
You should have text of license in package.
'gem install' should be in install part of spec file.
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=708990
--- Comment #2 from Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano@redhat.com 2011-05-30 09:10:02 EDT --- 'gem install' could be in prep because otherwise after fedpkg prep will be there only packed gem.
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=708990
--- Comment #3 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-05-31 06:46:29 EDT --- I have uploaded new revision: Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-open4.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/vondruch/rubygem-open4-1.0.1-2.fc16.src.rpm
Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=3101742
(In reply to comment #1)
Requires: rubygems >= 0 Why must be requires bigger than 0?
Sorry, forgot to do some necessary cleanup.
Where is Ruby license stated? I didn't find it in package.
https://github.com/ahoward/open4/blob/master/README#L365
Apparently the LICENSE file should be included in next upstream release which is not ready yet.
https://github.com/ahoward/open4/commit/e3e61cda38b36cc280cbe3fe0a09e7baec5a...
You should have text of license in package.
Is it worth of the work? I don't think so.
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=708990
Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-review+
--- Comment #4 from Marcela Mašláňová mmaslano@redhat.com 2011-05-31 10:41:38 EDT --- APPROVED
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=708990
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flag| |fedora-cvs?
--- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-06-01 04:49:13 EDT --- Thank you for your review.
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: vondruch Short Description: open4 is library for management of child processes Owners: vondruch Branches: InitialCC:
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=708990
--- Comment #6 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-06-01 12:11:18 EDT --- devel branch is created by default, and shouldn't be explicitly requested.
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=708990
Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |limb@jcomserv.net Flag| |fedora-cvs?
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=708990
--- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-06-01 12:14:02 EDT --- Git done (by process-git-requests).
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=708990
Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|ASSIGNED |CLOSED Resolution| |DUPLICATE Last Closed| |2011-06-02 07:06:49
--- Comment #8 from Vít Ondruch vondruch@redhat.com 2011-06-02 07:06:49 EDT --- Ups, now I have noticed rubygem-open4 is already in Fedora. I don't understand how I could missed that. Shame on me :/
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 642577 ***
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=708990
--- Comment #9 from Jon Ciesla limb@jcomserv.net 2011-06-02 09:16:47 EDT --- And me, and Marcela. At least one of us should have caught that. :)
package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org