On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 07:24:18AM +0530, Balasankar C wrote: > On 16 June 2015 2:20:24 am IST, "Cédric Boutillier" <boutil@debian.org> wrote: > >On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 08:12:03PM +0530, Balasankar C wrote: > >> Hi, > >> I've prepared the packaging of the gem 'rotp' which is a runtime > >> dependency in the dependency chain of GitLab. It is lintian-happy. > >> Since it requires RSpec 3, I have targeted it for experimental. It > >> builds fine in chroot (with RSpec 3 from experimental). Even though > >> the gem bundles an executable with it, I've named the package > >> ruby-rotp as the executable usage seemed trivial as per upstream > >readme. > > > >I would probably prefer rotp-ruby for the binary name. It has the > >advantage of being proposed when tab-completing the command line. > >Since rspec3 arrived in unstable, you can now target unstable for your > >package (but still indicate in the build-depend line that it needs > >ruby-rspec (>= 3~). > > > >Cheers, > > > >Cédric > Cedric, > Sorry, but I didn't get you. The binary file is still named "rotp" > (bin/rotp) . So auto complete should work fine while executing the > binary. I am the one to be sorry. I completely misread your email. Because of the context of a previous email about rex, I thought you renamed the tool in bin/ to ruby-rotp to avoid collisions. My bad. Sorry again for the confusion my message could have caused. Cheers, Cédric
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature