You probably noticed, that there is ongoing build of all Python packages
in Copr  and today, I was approached by Miroslav Suchý, that he'd
like to do the same for rubygems. And this in turn triggered these
1) Would you be interested to create ruby-sig group in FAS? We could
make the group owner of some packages and in turn, the members of the
group could maintain the packages, without explicitly asking for some ACLs.
2) For the Copr rebuild of rubygems, there needs to be some FAS group
again. Python guys are asking for "pypi-builds-sig" group , hence
following their lead, I'd like to ask for "rubygems-builds-sig" group
(note that although I don't like the '-sig' suffix in this case, it is
mandated by the infrastructure ticket template).
So what are your thoughts?
Time is running past and it is almost 6 months of development of Ruby
2.4. So I started to prepare some test build again. I am pushing all the
changes into private-ruby-2.4 branch of dist-git if you are interested
and here is the build of r55184:
One notable change is that XMLRPC library was extracted into separate
gem, so rubygem-xmlrpc is now available as Ruby subpackage.
Please give it a try and let me know if anything goes wrong.
I just finished new build of Ruby 2.3.1 in Rawhide and there are a few
notable fixes, possible breaking changes and improvements I'd like to
1) This update was triggered mainly by update of OpenSSL in Rawhide,
which made Ruby FTBFS. So temporarily, until we get Ruby 2.4 into
Rawhide (which won't be sooner than January 2017), the Ruby is build
against compat-openssl10, i.e. we continue to use OpenSSL 1.0.x series.
There might be apparently some issues, when OpenSSL 1.1.x is loaded into
memory at the same time as OpenSSL 1.0.x. I had to apply one patch 
to avoid SEGVs in test suites of rubygem-typhoeus and rubygem-ethon. If
you by a chance notice some other OpenSSL related issues, please report
it either into BZ or upstream. You can probably use ticket , where I
am asking how is Ruby upstream going to handle the OpenSSL compatibility
2) When I was fiddling with the OpenSSL, I noticed, that Ruby is not
hardened properly. This is due to weird way how upstream is (not)using
typical environment variables for compilation flag configuration. I
workarounded that, so Ruby should be properly hardened now. Please
report any buil/runtime issues you might encounter. If it should cause
major issues, we can revert this and postpone for Ruby 2.4 mass rebuild.
3) Since I was doing the update, I introduced the "gemspec_add_dep" and
"gemspec_remove_dep" macros, which I already discussed in this thread
. They are not officially documented anywhere yet, but feel free to
(test/)use them. Hopefully will find some nice place where to document
them. I'd love to have some other place for documentation than
guidelines, something like Java packaging documentation . For the
moment, please follow the source . And feel free to chime in with
some interesting ideas ;)
Look good to me.
Dne 29.9.2016 v 21:38 Glen Rundblom napsal(a):
> Ah, I understand now, thank you Vit!
> I have made that change.
> Here is what I have now (in text mode instead of the HTML paste I was
> 4.1.1. Ruby on Rails 5.0
> Developers will get support for a system-packaged Ruby on Rails of the
> latest version. The update to Rails 5.0 will bring:
> * Action Cable: A new framework that seamlessly integrates WebSockets
> with the rest of a Rails application.
> * API mode: Rails applications can be created by using rails new
> backend --api
> * Action Record attributes with a type on a model.
> * Exclusive use of Rails CLI over Rake.
> * Test Runner: enhanced abilities to run tests from Rails.
> * Sprockets 3
> * Turbolinks 5
> A helpful guide for upgrading Ruby on Rails can be found at:
> For more information about Ruby on Rails 5, and sources of this
> information can be found at:
> http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2016/6/30/Rails-5-0-final/, and
> On 09/29/2016 02:08 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> Hi Glen, just one nit:
>> Dne 28.9.2016 v 06:13 Glen Rundblom napsal(a):
>>> Rails CLI over Rake.
>> This should be "Exclusive use of |rails| CLI over Rake" otherwise it
>> does not make sense. Just to explain, a lot of stuff on command line
>> was historically done using commands such as "rake db:migrate" or
>> "rails new myapp" while now the same tasks are executed as "rails
>> db:migrate" or "rails new myapp".