[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096

Germano Massullo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |DEFERRED
  Flags|needinfo?(germano.massullo@ |
   |gmail.com)  |
Last Closed||2017-02-20 05:38:55



--- Comment #14 from Germano Massullo  ---
Comment #12

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096

Jun Aruga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||needinfo?(germano.massullo@
   ||gmail.com)



--- Comment #13 from Jun Aruga  ---
Germano,
As you are reporter of this ticket, you can do close the bugreport by yourself.
It's up to you.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #12 from Germano Massullo  ---
At
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/celluloid-ruby/q-zj1H34e4A/U2b3uCTXDQAJ
Donovan Keme said "We are expecting to refactor to avoid submodules, but not
sure when."

I replied that I will wait for a refactor before trying again to package
celluloid.
I think that for the moment we could close the bugreport as "Won't fix" and
then in future re-open it to proceed with the packaging.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #11 from Germano Massullo  ---
I have just wrote to celluloid developers. I am waiting for a reply

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #10 from Jun Aruga  ---
Okay!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096

Germano Massullo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|needinfo?(germano.massullo@ |
   |gmail.com)  |



--- Comment #9 from Germano Massullo  ---
(In reply to Jun Aruga from comment #8)
> How is the status?

Until the end of the week I should send an email to upstream asking them
suggestions on how to proceed because at the moment I could not manage to
package a software with those git submodules

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096

Jun Aruga  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||germano.massu...@gmail.com
  Flags||needinfo?(germano.massullo@
   ||gmail.com)



--- Comment #8 from Jun Aruga  ---
How is the status?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #7 from Germano Massullo  ---
Ok I will study how to implement tests in celluloid-essentials

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #6 from Jun Aruga  ---
(In reply to Germano Massullo from comment #3)
> Let's talk first about tests, because I think it is the biggest part to deal
> with.
> If I am right, enabling tests will require all "development dependencies"
> you can see at [1]. Many of them are not available in Fedora repositories
> 
> [1]: https://rubygems.org/gems/celluloid-essentials/versions/0.20.5

I think enabling tests will not require all "development dependencies", as Vit
said.
We do not test about benchmark, coverage, static code analysis (rubocop and
etc). We also do not use Bundler for our test in check section.

We want to test the logic, because there is often our environment specified
issue.

We sometimes comment out a test case in the test suite with "sed" command, and
etc, when it needs a development dependency that is not available in Fedora.

There are some tricky but typical techniques to package RPM.

For reference, you can see "sed" command lines in check section.
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-sprockets.git/tree/rubygem-sprockets.spec
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-puma.git/tree/rubygem-puma.spec


If you want to see more sample spec files about rubygem-*, for example you can
search by below search query on Google, to find those.

```
"rubygem-*.git" sed site:pkgs.fedoraproject.org filetype:spec
```

I think the adding test logic in check section may be a hard process for you,
especially if you are first time to do it. But after you have experienced
several packages, you may be accustomed to do it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #5 from Vít Ondruch  ---
BTW from the list of dependencies, I guess that it would be possible to avoid
following packages:

benchmark_suite >= 0
bundler >= 0
coveralls >= 0
guard-rspec >= 0
pry >= 0
rake >= 0
rubocop >= 0
transpec >= 0

Not sure about these:

dotenv >= 0
nenv >= 0

The remaining packages might be just circular dependencies with culluloid*
packages and RSpec. Not bad IMO.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096

Vít Ondruch  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||vondr...@redhat.com



--- Comment #4 from Vít Ondruch  ---
(In reply to Germano Massullo from comment #3)
> If I am right, enabling tests will require all "development dependencies"
> you can see at [1]. Many of them are not available in Fedora repositories

Well, you probably want to be more precise about what steps you have taken to
enable the tests and what issues you were facing.

You will definitely need some of the dependencies, but you won't need most of
them. It is also possible, the you will need to do some boostrapping round
before you'll be able to enable the tests, but I think it is worth of the
effort.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #3 from Germano Massullo  ---
Let's talk first about tests, because I think it is the biggest part to deal
with.
If I am right, enabling tests will require all "development dependencies" you
can see at [1]. Many of them are not available in Fedora repositories

[1]: https://rubygems.org/gems/celluloid-essentials/versions/0.20.5

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096



--- Comment #2 from Jun Aruga  ---
Hi I reviewed it!

# Summary

- Dot files.
  You can do following way to prevenet rpmlint warnings "hidden-file-or-dir",
  removing the lines %{gem_instdir}/.gitmodules, and etc.
  I would recommend you use rpmlint tool by yourself.

```
%files
...
%exclude %{gem_instdir}/.*
...
```

- Group tag 
  Personally I have never added Group in the spec file.
  So, could you tell me why it is needed?

- I think that you can remove the comment out lines "# BuildRequires: *" to
simplify
  though it is generated from gem2rpm template.

- Add test logic in %check section.
  Upstream has test logic.
  So, you can add the test logic.
  See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Ruby#Running_test_suites
  See .travis.yml, spec/, and
https://travis-ci.org/celluloid/celluloid-essentials

  I think first step to run the test, is run the upstream test on your local,
  Because of this error.

```
$ git clone g...@github.com:celluloid/celluloid-essentials.git
$ cd celluloid-essentials/
$ bundle install --path vendor/bundle
[!] There was an error parsing `Gemfile`: cannot load such file --
/home/jaruga/git/celluloid-essentials/culture/sync. Bundler cannot continue.

 #  from /home/jaruga/git/celluloid-essentials/Gemfile:1 
 #  ---
 >  require File.expand_path("../culture/sync", __FILE__)
 #  Celluloid::Sync::Gemfile[self]
 #  ---

```

- %files section
  I want to suggest the way
  - %files: only License document, and minimam files to run the library.
  - %files doc: other documents.

  - %{gem_instdir}/CHANGES.md
Move to %files doc section with
  %doc %{gem_instdir}/CHANGES.md
  - %{gem_instdir}/tasks
Move to %files doc





# The result of Fedora review

$ fedora-review -b 1370096





Package Review
==

Legend:
[x] = Pass, [!] = Fail, [-] = Not applicable, [?] = Not evaluated
[ ] = Manual review needed


Issues:
===
- Package installs properly.
  Note: Installation errors (see attachment)
  See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines


= MUST items =

Generic:
[X]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
 other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
 Guidelines.
[X]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
 Note: There is no build directory. Running licensecheck on vanilla
 upstream sources. No licenses found. Please check the source files for
 licenses manually.
[X]: License file installed when any subpackage combination is installed.
[X]: Package must own all directories that it creates.
 Note: Directories without known owners: /usr/share/gems,
 /usr/share/gems/doc
[X]: Package contains no bundled libraries without FPC exception.
[X]: Changelog in prescribed format.
[X]: Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[-]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application.
[X]: Development files must be in a -devel package
[X]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[X]: Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
 names).
[X]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[X]: Package does not generate any conflict.
[X]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[X]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and
 Provides are present.
[?]: Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[X]: Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need.
[X]: Package is not known to require an ExcludeArch tag.
[X]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines
[x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least
 one supported primary architecture.
[x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces.
 Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment).
[x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
 license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
 license(s) for the package is included in %license.
[x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
 that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[x]: Package uses either %{buildroot} or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT
[x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
 beginning of %install.
[x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: Dist tag is present.
[x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: Package use %makeinstall only when make install DESTDIR=... doesn't
 work.
[x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters.
[x]: Package does not 

[Bug 1370096] Review Request: rubygem-celluloid-essentials - Internally used tools, and superstructural dependencies of Celluloid

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1370096

Germano Massullo  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

Summary|rubygem-celluloid-essential |Review Request:
   |s - Internally used tools,  |rubygem-celluloid-essential
   |and superstructural |s - Internally used tools,
   |dependencies of Celluloid   |and superstructural
   ||dependencies of Celluloid



-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
___
package-review mailing list -- package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org