I haven't had the time to be a good steward on a number of these packages.
Several I picked up when I was much more involved with EPEL, and others
when I was just doing lots of ruby. Please feel free to take them over, as
I will be orphaning them in pkgdb soon.
- rpms/ruby-dbus
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 14.3.2013 16:49, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 14.3.2013 02:49, Michael Stahnke napsal(a):
What is the date to get a newer Puppet into F19
At Puppet labs we packaged up Unicorn, and rainbows for some testing
and it went pretty well also, especially with Nginx. I was planning
to clean those up and submit, but looks like you beat me to it.
Great news for us, Mongrel is painful to deal with. :)
2012/1/20 Guillermo Gómez
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi stahnma,
We are looking into Bundler now to find a cure.
Could you please try the attached patch? It is done against master, however
it should be straight forward to backport if needed.
Patch applied cleanly. I
Thanks for the feedback.
When building, I don't have
%global gem_extdir %{_libdir}/gems/exts/%{gem_name}-%{version}
as a macro. If I take that out, I get an error in mock. The rest of
the macros seem to be ok.
Other changes are being incorporated. I do appreciate the feedback,
even it is a
When installing a gem natively using ruby 1.9.3 package built from the
github ruby.spec, I'm having trouble using them, specifically with
bundler.
When I install sqlite3, I get a shared object in
[root@centos6-32 gems]# locate sqlite3_native.so
I'm working on building out Puppet on Ruby 1.9 for my day job at
Puppet Labs. I also recently took over ruby-shadow since it was
orphaned. Upstream has moved to github and they now only distribute
as a gem. So, the package will be renamed to rubygem-ruby-shadow.
I *think* I've follwed the new
Has gem2rpm been updated for the Ruby 1.9 changes? The guidelines
seem quite a bit different, an the gem2rpm macros in the current state
(at least on EL6) don't map up. Things like
%gemdir rather than %gem_dir.
___
ruby-sig mailing list
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Vít Ondruch vondr...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi rubyists,
Just to let you know about the schedule.
1) The Fedora feature page [1] was marked as FeatureReadyForWrangler. So
hopefully, Ruby 1.9.3 will be approved by next FESCo meeting which should be
held at
Thanks for these rpms. I've been trying to get the 1.9.3 srpm to rebuild
onto EL6 and I've been having some issues. It looks to be centered around
autoconf and m4 (surprise ensues). I can cleanly compile ruby 1.9.3
outside the spec file (without patches, macros etc) but once I attempt to
build
2010/12/26 Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com:
On 25/12/10 17:12, Michael Stahnke wrote:
On a side note, rubygems.org now has as many package as CPAN does for
perl. We could really use a lot more ruby packagers.
Wow, mxmas to us all !
Can we have some figures? I thought we were
We talked it over with the ruby sig and decided that rails 3.x was
probably best for EPEL6. However, since then, I have run into several
packages, including ones I use everyday that require rails 2.3.x or
it's dependencies. I am proposing to put in rails 2.3.x and then have
a rails3 package set
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Robin Bowes robin-li...@robinbowes.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm not a heavy ruby user (I don't use it on my F13 workstation, I use
it on CentOS for puppet) but my view is that, as standard, Fedora should
ship a single ruby version - preferably a recent one. I would
As discussed the last few weeks during the EPEL weekly meeting, the
rubygem-rack package will be updating in EPEL5. There are no current
packages that depend on its current version (0.4), but there are
several that require rack 1.0.
rubygem-rack will be moving to version 1.1 in EPEL 5. This
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:11 PM, Ohad Levy ohadl...@redhat.com wrote:
On Monday 25 October 2010 19:56:46 Michael Stahnke wrote:
rubygem-rack version 1.1 should allow for usage with Sinatra, Padrino,
Merb, many versions of Rails, and more.
afair, rack 1.1 only works with Rails 2.3.8
Also as a note the version of rails in epel 5 does not depend on rack
in any way.
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
his is not Rack/Sinatra relevant bug, but Ruby 1.8.6 bug.
After I tried this gem with Ruby 1.8.7 installed through 'rvm', this
exception dissapears and all stuff is working normally now.
I hope we will have Ruby 1.8.7 soon ;-)
That rules out Rack-1.2 for EPEL5 and EPEL6, as ruby is still
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Jim Meyering j...@meyering.net wrote:
Mohammed Morsi wrote:
I had thought Ruby 1.8.7 was going to be pushed to RHEL 6, afterall I
helped do a bunch of work on the RHEL package with Jim Meyering. CC'ing
him here to address this question further.
Ruby 1.8.7
kanarip rubygem-shoulda-2.11.3-1.fc15
rubygem-shoulda-doc
Shoulda includes two rails fixtures as test cases for shoulda. They
have a 'vendor' directory as most rails applications do, but they
basically empty. I don't think any change is required for this.
Shoulda
I tried to triage many of the rubygem reviews last night. We have
roughly 35 of them.
I would really appreciate it if somebody could look at the review
request for rubygem-rack1 for epel. Having that package in epel will
fix some dependency bugs and eventually allow sinatra in epel.
2010/8/30 Guillermo Gómez guillermo.go...@gmail.com:
This email is just to know if anyone from this SIG will be attending
Tempe Fudcon2011, i will, so it would be nice to use FUDCon to promote
ruby in general so i would like to start gathering info to get together
there.
Toshio proposed to
I will drop a quick word of encouragement to also maintain branches in
EPEL5/6. If you are unable to due to technical reasons, I understand
(needs a newer rubygem(rack) or rails or something). If there are
other reasons holding you back from getting ruby packages into EPEL,
contact me and I'll
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Mamoru Tasaka
mtas...@ioa.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp wrote:
Hello, all:
I have released the ownership on the packages I maintain(ed) on EPEL6 (only):
rubygem-activeldap
rubygem-hoe
rubygem-rubyforge
If you are interested, please feel free to take over maintainership
I've trying to look at this bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=572722
I think an option is simply to create a rails2.3 package. I realize
this probably less than ideal, but the only real solution I see for
the problem. Thoughts?
Mike
Do you have the source available to that script, or was that more of a
manual effort?
stahnma
___
ruby-sig mailing list
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
25 matches
Mail list logo
