[Bug 220683] Review Request: rubygems - the Ruby standard for packaging ruby libraries

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request: rubygems - the Ruby standard for packaging ruby libraries


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220683


kevin at tummy.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |kevin at tummy.com
OtherBugsDependingO|163776                      |163778
              nThis|                            |




------- Additional Comments From kevin at tummy.com  2006-12-28 00:13 EST -------
OK - Package meets naming and packaging guidelines
OK - Spec file matches base package name.
see below - Spec has consistant macro usage.
OK - Meets Packaging Guidelines.
See below - License
See below - License field in spec matches
See below - License file included in package
OK - Spec in American English
OK - Spec is legible.
OK - Sources match upstream md5sum:
5d496e1f415b8b4033ab867f01d1161f  rubygems-0.9.0.tgz
5d496e1f415b8b4033ab867f01d1161f  rubygems-0.9.0.tgz.1
OK - BuildRequires correct
See below - Package has %defattr and permissions on files is good.
OK - Package has a correct %clean section.
OK - Package has correct buildroot
OK - Package is code or permissible content.
OK - Packages %doc files don't affect runtime.

OK - Package compiles and builds on at least one arch.
OK - Package has no duplicate files in %files.
OK - Package doesn't own any directories other packages own.
OK - Package owns all the directories it creates.
OK - No rpmlint output.
OK - final provides and requires are sane:

SHOULD Items:

OK - Should build in mock.
OK - Should build on all supported archs
OK - Should have dist tag
OK - Should package latest version

Issues:

1. You seem to be mixing
%{buildroot}
and
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT
best to pick one macro style and stick with it.

2. What is the license here?
The web page says: License: Ruby License

Your spec says "GPL"

The source files all say: "# See LICENSE.txt for permissions."
There is no included LICENSE.txt file.

3. Might change
%defattr(-, root, root)
to
%defattr(-, root, root,-)

4. The i386 and x86_64 packages are different, which if this should really be
noarch. I see in them: 

/usr/lib/ruby/gems/

/usr/lib64/ruby/gems/

5. Do you need the 'ruby' BuildRequires since you have ruby-devel?
That should pull that in I would think...


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.