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

Regards, Mamoru