On 11/10/10 at 14:43 -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí: > > On 10/10/10 at 04:23 +0200, Vincent Carmona wrote: > > > 2010/10/9 Antonio Terceiro <[email protected]>: > > > > Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí: > > > >> I think that it would be better to have a separate tool that does the > > > >> gem2tgz conversion properly. That tool could then be used by gemwatch. > > > > > > > > Ok. > > > > > > > > Would you say that the conversion done by gemwatch is good enough > > > > already, or is it missing something? > > > > I'm not too familiar with the conversion done by gemwatch. > > > > It would be nice to dump the gem metadata in a yaml file in the root of > > the tarball, so it can be reused by a tgz->dsc tool. > > ok, that's exactly what gemwatch already did. > > > > I think that Lucas means that gemwatch can use a tool (i.e. gem2tgz) > > > to do the conversion but gemwatch and this tool must be 2 separate > > > projects. > > > > well, very lightweight "projects", then. :-) > > Since gem2tgz might be useful for others than Debian, I thing they > should be 2 separate things indeed. > > So, there it is: I extracted the gem/tarball conversion logic from > gemwatch and created gem2tgz. > > svn+ssh://svn.debian.org/svn/pkg-ruby-extras/trunk/gem2tgz > > I would appreciate some review (and eventually sponsoring ;)) > > I've also changed gemwatch to use it, but having the new code in > production will require uploading a lenny backport of gem2tgz and > getting it installed on alioth.
Hi, I haven't looked at it in details, but was wondering whether it wouldn't fit better in ruby-pkg-tools. I don't think that we should have several packages containing scripts for the packaging of ruby libraries. - Lucas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
