RFC: ruby-coveralls (NEW)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RFC: ruby-coveralls (NEW)

Miguel Landaeta-3
Hi folks,

Before uploading this NEW package I would appreciate if somebody more
experienced with Ruby packaging than myself can take a brief look[1] at
ruby-coveralls package.

I think it's mostly OK, lintian clean, etc.

However, I'm not quite sure If I got right the testing part. In
particular this package's testing machinery depends on vcr and webmock
so I have to disable that.

Thanks,


1. git://anonscm.debian.org/pkg-ruby-extras/ruby-coveralls.git

--
Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org
secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at
http://db.debian.org/fetchkey.cgi?fingerprint=4CB7FE1E280ECC90F29A597E6E608B637D8967E9
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." -- Nietzsche

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: ruby-coveralls (NEW)

Cédric Boutillier-6
Dear Miguel,

On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 09:02:43PM -0300, Miguel Landaeta wrote:
> Hi folks,

> Before uploading this NEW package I would appreciate if somebody more
> experienced with Ruby packaging than myself can take a brief look[1] at
> ruby-coveralls package.

> I think it's mostly OK, lintian clean, etc.

> However, I'm not quite sure If I got right the testing part. In
> particular this package's testing machinery depends on vcr and webmock
> so I have to disable that.

Before looking at the package, I would like to know if you are
really interested in having ruby-coveralls packaged in Debian, or
if you found it has a (build-)dependency for another project.

I am asking because I encounter several gems requiring coveralls in
tests. My opinion on tests has been that it is a great benefit to be
able to run test suites at build time, but getting test coverage
statistics is not of much interest for us (that is more a tool for
upstream developpers). That is why I have been patching out uses of
simplecov/coveralls in test suites.

Moreover, according to coveralls for docs:
https://coveralls.io/
the prerequisites for coveralls on Ruby gems are:
- the code should be hosted on Github;
- the code should build on Travis or a similar platform;
[I've never used coveralls myself though]

Hence I do not see at the moment any use case for a ruby-coveralls
package. But maybe I missed something. If it is the case, then please
correct me.

Cheers,

Cédric

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: ruby-coveralls (NEW)

Miguel Landaeta-3
Hi Cédric,

On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Cédric Boutillier wrote:
>
> Before looking at the package, I would like to know if you are
> really interested in having ruby-coveralls packaged in Debian, or
> if you found it has a (build-)dependency for another project.

I packaged it primarily because is a B-D of several Ruby packages
I prepared recently and I'm aware is not a library very useful from
Debian PoV due to its requirements on Github and Travis stuff.

However, I anticipate that I'm going to need that library for a
project I'll develop in the future and I'd would like to have it
packaged in Debian.

That was also the reason why I was poking the ITPs bugs for vcr and
webmock because I'd like to see those testing frameworks available
in Debian soon although I didn't the chance yet to see what's blocking
it.

> Hence I do not see at the moment any use case for a ruby-coveralls
> package. But maybe I missed something. If it is the case, then please
> correct me.

As you say, right now it doesn't have an inmmediate use case in Debian
but expect to run this software from workstation deployed with Debian
so I think it doesn't hurt to package it.

Cheers,

--
Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org
secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at
http://db.debian.org/fetchkey.cgi?fingerprint=4CB7FE1E280ECC90F29A597E6E608B637D8967E9
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." -- Nietzsche

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: ruby-coveralls (NEW)

Cédric Boutillier-6
Hi Miguel,

Thanks for your explanations.

I had a quick look at your ruby-coveralls package. Everything looks
fine for me, at least I didn't find any problems in its Ruby specific
aspects.

Cheers,

Cédric

signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFC: ruby-coveralls (NEW)

Miguel Landaeta-3
Hi Cédric,

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:00:21PM +0100, Cédric Boutillier wrote:
> Thanks for your explanations.
>
> I had a quick look at your ruby-coveralls package. Everything looks
> fine for me, at least I didn't find any problems in its Ruby specific
> aspects.

Thanks for the review. I'll proceed with the upload then.

Cheers,

--
Miguel Landaeta, nomadium at debian.org
secure email with PGP 0x6E608B637D8967E9 available at
http://db.debian.org/fetchkey.cgi?fingerprint=4CB7FE1E280ECC90F29A597E6E608B637D8967E9
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." -- Nietzsche

signature.asc (853 bytes) Download Attachment