Product: Fedora
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=894524

Vít Ondruch <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[email protected]

--- Comment #7 from Vít Ondruch <[email protected]> ---
(In reply to comment #5)
> -doc package either need to requires the main package, or it need to ship
> the license file.

Actually it already requires the main package and that is the only possibility
in this case. Not because of the license, but because of the doc folder
ownership.

BTW, Troy,

* there is %{gem_docdir} macro which you should use instead of
%{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version} and it should be marked as a %doc

* %doc %{gem_instdir}/Gemfile in contrary should not be marked as a doc, since
it is obviously not documentation.

* What is the content of %{gem_instdir}/vendor ? Even the name is scary and
suggest some bundling, which is prohibited on Fedora [1]. I admit that I did
not checked what is inside, though

* I would appreciate if you can run some test suite, if feasible.

* You should be using %gem_install macro [2] (especially because your install
command does not generate RDoc documentation, which we used to have available
on Fedora.


[1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Duplication_of_system_libraries
[2] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/256

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Unsubscribe from this bug 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=DZO4WYjZZX&a=cc_unsubscribe
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review

Reply via email to