[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFS: ruby-execjs, ruby-mail, ruby-session



Hi Caitlin,

About ruby-session, if we don't have news about the license from
upstream before August, 10, I'll upload the package as is.

On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 11:55:27PM -0400, Caitlin Matos wrote:
> On 27/07/14 12:44 AM, Cédric Boutillier wrote:
> >Here are some about ruby-execjs:
> >- the remark above about the debian/* tags applies here.
> >- I see that you imported an upstream file from the Github repository to
> >   create the debian/ruby-tests. It might be better to use as the
> >   upstream tarball the one from Github, instead of the one generated
> >   from the gem, and patch if needed the tests.

> Ah, didn't think of that. I was mimicking what the previous packager had
> done.

> Just to clarify, though, should I reset (or maybe just revert) the history
> and import the github version? I'm asking because I thought that was
> generally frowned upon once the changes have been pushed...

There is no need to reset the history. You can just import the tarball
from github with gbp import-orig --pristine-tar. For this you should
either delete the upstream tag corresponding to the gem, or add a suffix
to the upstream version number to differentiate it from the one you
imported before (sometimes, +gh is used for that). Then you can point
the debian/watch file to look at the releases on the Github page instead
of the gemwatch one. You can also ask upstream to add the tests to the
next gem.

> >   The ruby-coffee-script-source package contains a copy of the
> >   coffee-script.js script. Instead of including the test_coffeescript in
> >   a begin/rescue/end block, maybe build-depend on that package and use
> >   the copy it contains.

> I had thought about just adding the build dependency, but I wasn't sure if
> that was the right approach, since it's not "mandatory". Now that I'm
> thinking about it again, that seems like a silly rationale. I'll change it.

It is not needed at runtime, just for the tests. So installation of
ruby-execjs will not force the installation of ruby-coffee-script-source
for the user. You could however add ruby-coffee-script-source to the
Suggests: line as it seems that they can be used together.

Cédric

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: