Vít Ondruch wrote, at 07/18/2011 04:37 PM +9:00:
Dne 18.7.2011 01:42, TASAKA Mamoru napsal(a):
> Mo Morsi wrote, at 07/15/2011 11:15 AM +9:00:
>> On 07/13/2011 02:53 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> Since February, there are available RSpec 2.x in Fedora repositories.
>>> However, as of now, the main package rubygem-rspec was not migrated to
>>> RSpec 2.x and still provides RSpec 1.3 functionality. It would be nice,
>>> if we could finish the migration to RSpec 2.x lets say in F17 time
>>> frame. What are your opinions? The list of packages which depends on
>>> RSpec 1.3 is attached bellow.
>>>
>> IMO F17 seems like a reasonable timeline for this. At that point we
>> might also want to provide a rubygem-rspec1-compat package for any gems
>> whose upstream communities haven't switched over.
>>
> Can't we do this (i.e. rspec 2 by default, rspec 1 move to compat mode)
> before F-16/17 branch (i.e. 2011-07-26)?
Is it worth of it? We can push the change right now, but it will make
some packages FTBFS. Don't take me wrong, I personally +1 for this
change, I just wanted to give a chance to others to be prepared.
With rubygem-rspec1 imported, I will change all packages which currently
have "BR: rubygem(rspec)" to "BR: rubygem(rspec1)" and rebuild all
those srpms.
If those srpm don't have FTBFS issue right now, they should also succeed on
building after this change (if they fail to build after this change, I guess
they already had FTBFS issue)
Well,
- We cannot have two "rubygem-rspec" srpm (on Fedora repository), so anyway
one of these should be renamed on srpm name level. With srpm renamed to
"rubygem-rspec1", I think reconstructuring directories and especially
changing rspec-1.X.gemspec to rspec"1"-1.X.gemspec would be less confusing
as it "matches" currently rubygem based rpms' structure
- Anyway I think we can agree with any of the ways.
> With these rpms,
> - people who wants to use rspec 1 has to specify it as
> (Build)Requires: rubygem(rspec1), rubygem(rspec), and to use
> "gem 'rspec1'", not "gem 'rspec'".
/usr/bin/spec remains as before.
> - people who want to use rspec 2 will specify it as
> (Build)Requires: rubygem(rspec), and "gem 'rspec'". Note that
> /usr/bin/rspec is (already) in rubygem-rspec-core-2.6.4.
>
> If we can agree with these changes, I will submit these specs/srpms for
> review requests.
Regards,
Mamoru