Re: Packaging pre-release version

2016-12-06 Thread Pavel Valena 

- Original Message -
> From: "Pavel Valena" <pval...@redhat.com>
> To: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
> Cc: "Ruby SIG mailing list" <ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 1:12:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Packaging pre-release version
> 
> 
> > - Original Message -
> > > From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
> > > To: "Ruby SIG mailing list" <ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 10:45:01 AM
> > > Subject: Packaging pre-release version
> > > 
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > I am working on rubygem-asciidoctor-mallard review [1] and since there
> > > was not released stable version yet, the pre-release version (actually
> > > git snapshot) needs to be packaged. And now I realized it is more PITA
> > > then it should be.
> > > 
> > > The main issue is with the way, how pre-release packages are versioned.
> > > E.g. in rubygem-asciidoctor-mallard case, the upstream version is
> > > "0.1.0.dev" which transforms in Fedora into "0.1.0-0.1.dev" and
> > > subsequently, no standard macro works.
> 
> I wonder what would happen when you try to `dnf update` from 0.1.0.dev to
> 0.1.0? Will it behave correctly?
> 
> Additionally, like you said, the correct version in fedora is
> '0.1.0-0.1.dev'[1], to which you will not conform to, or is there something
> that I missed?

Sorry, please disregard the questions, as I have after an offline inquiry 
realized that only macros for rubygems are to be changed, and not the package 
version itself.

> 
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning#Pre-Release_packages
> 

Pavel Valena
Associate Software Engineer
Brno, Czech Republic

RED HAT | TRIED. TESTED. TRUSTED.
All of the airlines in the Fortune Global 500 rely on Red Hat.
Find out why at Trusted | Red Hat

<http://www.redhat.com/en/about/trusted>
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Packaging pre-release version

2016-12-06 Thread Pavel Valena 

- Original Message -
> From: "Jun Aruga" <jar...@redhat.com>
> To: "Ruby SIG mailing list" <ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 11:40:38 AM
> Subject: Re: Packaging pre-release version
> 
> +1
> I will agree with this if it is inspired from nokogiri's way.
> The macro helps people to packaging pre-release version.
> 
> Jun Aruga
> 
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Vít Ondruch" <vondr...@redhat.com>
> > To: "Ruby SIG mailing list" <ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 10:45:01 AM
> > Subject: Packaging pre-release version
> > 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I am working on rubygem-asciidoctor-mallard review [1] and since there
> > was not released stable version yet, the pre-release version (actually
> > git snapshot) needs to be packaged. And now I realized it is more PITA
> > then it should be.
> > 
> > The main issue is with the way, how pre-release packages are versioned.
> > E.g. in rubygem-asciidoctor-mallard case, the upstream version is
> > "0.1.0.dev" which transforms in Fedora into "0.1.0-0.1.dev" and
> > subsequently, no standard macro works.

I wonder what would happen when you try to `dnf update` from 0.1.0.dev to 
0.1.0? Will it behave correctly?

Additionally, like you said, the correct version in fedora is 
'0.1.0-0.1.dev'[1], to which you will not conform to, or is there something 
that I missed? 

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Versioning#Pre-Release_packages

> > 
> > But the remedy could be quite simple. With this change:
> > 
> > ```
> > 
> > $ git diff
> > diff --git a/macros.rubygems b/macros.rubygems
> > index 45c59c4..0652ec6 100644
> > --- a/macros.rubygems
> > +++ b/macros.rubygems
> > @@ -3,12 +3,12 @@
> >  %gem_archdir %{_libdir}/gems
> >  
> >  # Common gem locations and files.
> > -%gem_instdir %{gem_dir}/gems/%{gem_name}-%{version}
> > -%gem_extdir_mri %{gem_archdir}/%{name}/%{gem_name}-%{version}
> > +%gem_instdir %{gem_dir}/gems/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}
> > +%gem_extdir_mri
> > %{gem_archdir}/%{name}/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}
> >  %gem_libdir %{gem_instdir}/lib
> > -%gem_cache %{gem_dir}/cache/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gem
> > -%gem_spec %{gem_dir}/specifications/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gemspec
> > -%gem_docdir %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version}
> > +%gem_cache %{gem_dir}/cache/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}.gem
> > +%gem_spec
> > %{gem_dir}/specifications/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}.gemspec
> > +%gem_docdir %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}
> >  
> >  
> >  # %gem_install - Install gem into appropriate directory.
> > @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ gem install \\\
> >  --build-root %{-d*}%{!?-d:.} \\\
> >  --force \\\
> >  --document=ri,rdoc \\\
> > -%{-n*}%{!?-n:%{gem_name}-%{version}.gem} \
> > +%{-n*}%{!?-n:%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}.gem} \
> >  %{nil}
> >  
> >  
> > 
> > ```
> > 
> > It would be enough to specify:
> > 
> > 
> > ```
> > 
> > %globalprerelease.dev
> > 
> > ```
> > 
> > 
> > in your .spec file and half of the lines I needed to add into the
> > pre-release package could be removed.
> > 
> > Please note that this is inspired by macros Mamoru is using for ages in
> > some of his packages (Nokogiri for example [2]).
> > 
> > (Actually, now I realized that the proposal in the review is more
> > complex then it should be, but that is a different story ...)
> > 
> > Any thoughts?
> > 
> > 
> > Vít
> > 
> > 
> > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1343977#add_comment
> > 
> > [2]
> > http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-nokogiri.git/tree/rubygem-nokogiri.spec?id=7f3b8d1685a6069868a83bbc412b176d43c70fb5
> > 
> > ___
> > ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > 
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Packaging pre-release version

2016-12-06 Thread Jun Aruga 
+1
I will agree with this if it is inspired from nokogiri's way.
The macro helps people to packaging pre-release version.

Jun Aruga

- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch" 
> To: "Ruby SIG mailing list" 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 10:45:01 AM
> Subject: Packaging pre-release version
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I am working on rubygem-asciidoctor-mallard review [1] and since there
> was not released stable version yet, the pre-release version (actually
> git snapshot) needs to be packaged. And now I realized it is more PITA
> then it should be.
> 
> The main issue is with the way, how pre-release packages are versioned.
> E.g. in rubygem-asciidoctor-mallard case, the upstream version is
> "0.1.0.dev" which transforms in Fedora into "0.1.0-0.1.dev" and
> subsequently, no standard macro works.
> 
> But the remedy could be quite simple. With this change:
> 
> ```
> 
> $ git diff
> diff --git a/macros.rubygems b/macros.rubygems
> index 45c59c4..0652ec6 100644
> --- a/macros.rubygems
> +++ b/macros.rubygems
> @@ -3,12 +3,12 @@
>  %gem_archdir %{_libdir}/gems
>  
>  # Common gem locations and files.
> -%gem_instdir %{gem_dir}/gems/%{gem_name}-%{version}
> -%gem_extdir_mri %{gem_archdir}/%{name}/%{gem_name}-%{version}
> +%gem_instdir %{gem_dir}/gems/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}
> +%gem_extdir_mri %{gem_archdir}/%{name}/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}
>  %gem_libdir %{gem_instdir}/lib
> -%gem_cache %{gem_dir}/cache/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gem
> -%gem_spec %{gem_dir}/specifications/%{gem_name}-%{version}.gemspec
> -%gem_docdir %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version}
> +%gem_cache %{gem_dir}/cache/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}.gem
> +%gem_spec
> %{gem_dir}/specifications/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}.gemspec
> +%gem_docdir %{gem_dir}/doc/%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}
>  
>  
>  # %gem_install - Install gem into appropriate directory.
> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ gem install \\\
>  --build-root %{-d*}%{!?-d:.} \\\
>  --force \\\
>  --document=ri,rdoc \\\
> -%{-n*}%{!?-n:%{gem_name}-%{version}.gem} \
> +%{-n*}%{!?-n:%{gem_name}-%{version}%{?prerelease}.gem} \
>  %{nil}
>  
>  
> 
> ```
> 
> It would be enough to specify:
> 
> 
> ```
> 
> %globalprerelease.dev
> 
> ```
> 
> 
> in your .spec file and half of the lines I needed to add into the
> pre-release package could be removed.
> 
> Please note that this is inspired by macros Mamoru is using for ages in
> some of his packages (Nokogiri for example [2]).
> 
> (Actually, now I realized that the proposal in the review is more
> complex then it should be, but that is a different story ...)
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> 
> Vít
> 
> 
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1343977#add_comment
> 
> [2]
> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-nokogiri.git/tree/rubygem-nokogiri.spec?id=7f3b8d1685a6069868a83bbc412b176d43c70fb5
> 
> ___
> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> 
___
ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org