[Bug 477533] Review Request: rubygem-mechanize - A handy web browsing ruby object
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Sun Jan 18 22:30:59 UTC 2009
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=477533
Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <oget.fedora at gmail.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
CC| |oget.fedora at gmail.com
AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org |oget.fedora at gmail.com
Flag| |fedora-review?
--- Comment #3 from Orcan 'oget' Ogetbil <oget.fedora at gmail.com> 2009-01-18 17:30:57 EDT ---
Hi Mamoru,
I reviewed this package. There are a few minor things to go through:
* rpmlint gives bunch of dangling-symlink warnings. But these are resolved by
the dependencies by the packages, so it is OK.
The other rpmlint complaints are:
rubygem-mechanize.noarch: E: zero-length
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mechanize-0.9.0/lib/www/mechanize/chain/post_connect_hook.rb
Is this needed?
rubygem-mechanize-doc.noarch: W: no-documentation
I see that both rubygem-gettext-doc and rubygem-zoom-doc install their
documentation (examples,test) inside %doc
What is the reason that this package is different?
rubygem-mechanize-doc.noarch: E: script-without-shebang
/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mechanize-0.9.0/test/htdocs/google.html
This is possibly a wrong permission error. It can easily be fixed.
ruby-mechanize.noarch: W: no-documentation
This one can be ignored.
* I don't think we need to package Manifest.txt. Do we usually package manifest
files on ruby packages?
* The license file and the website license page say GPLv2+. The source code
files do not indicate a license. I think setting the license as GPLc2+ will be
more appropriate.
* Latest version must be packaged. I can't find any information to confirm
this. Where is download section on the website?
* Ruby guidelines say: "A ruby extension/library package must indicate what it
provides with a Provides: ruby(LIBRARY) = VERSION declaration in the spec file"
So I think
Provides: ruby(%{gemname}) = %{version}-%{release}
Provides: rubygem(%{gemname}) = %{version}-%{release}
must be changed to
Provides: ruby(%{gemname}) = %{version}
Provides: rubygem(%{gemname}) = %{version}
* Do we need this line:?
#Requires: rubygem(hoe)
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list