Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.
Bug 1082332 - Review Request: nodejs-tiny-lr-fork - A tiny LiveReload server implementation you can spawn in the background
Summary: Review Request: nodejs-tiny-lr-fork - A tiny LiveReload server implementation...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: T.C. Hollingsworth
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On: 1082329 1082330
Blocks: nodejs-reviews 1082334
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-03-30 12:47 UTC by Jamie Nguyen
Modified: 2014-03-31 19:33 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-03-31 19:33:07 UTC
tchollingsworth: fedora-review+
gwync: fedora-cvs+


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jamie Nguyen 2014-03-30 12:47:26 UTC
Spec URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/nodejs-tiny-lr-fork.spec
SRPM URL: http://jamielinux.fedorapeople.org/gruntjs/SRPMS/nodejs-tiny-lr-fork-0.0.5-1.fc21.src.rpm
Fedora Account System Username: jamielinux

Description:
A tiny LiveReload server implementation you can spawn in the background.

Comment 2 T.C. Hollingsworth 2014-03-31 03:28:38 UTC
Looking at the names in %{_bindir} I'd guess this will conflict with the original tiny-lr.  But that upstream seems really dead, so I'm happy to ship this.

I'd suggest contacting upstream and let them know they can steal the real tiny-lr name if that upstream is really dead, following the advice in 'npm help disputes':
https://www.npmjs.org/doc/misc/npm-disputes.html

The note about the tests kinda freaks me out a little, are we too old or they?

Nothing blocking here though, so APPROVED.

Comment 3 Jamie Nguyen 2014-03-31 17:51:37 UTC
(In reply to T.C. Hollingsworth from comment #2)
> Looking at the names in %{_bindir} I'd guess this will conflict with the
> original tiny-lr.  But that upstream seems really dead, so I'm happy to ship
> this.
> 
> I'd suggest contacting upstream and let them know they can steal the real
> tiny-lr name if that upstream is really dead, following the advice in 'npm
> help disputes':
> https://www.npmjs.org/doc/misc/npm-disputes.html

There is a comment here from tiny-lr-fork maintainer: 
https://github.com/gruntjs/grunt-contrib-watch/pull/296#issuecomment-36043332
> I appreciate the intent but I don't consider tiny-lr
> "abandoned" unless @mklabs has stated he has abandoned
> it. I believe he is just on hiatus and hopefully will
> return (as he is a great developer I really appreciate
> his work).


> The note about the tests kinda freaks me out a little, are we too old or
> they?

They are too old. Our express and connect is right up to date! (Well, ok so in the time that it took me to post the updates and get them pushed to stable, there's been a new minor point release of both...)


> Nothing blocking here though, so APPROVED.

Thanks!

Comment 4 Jamie Nguyen 2014-03-31 17:52:43 UTC
New Package SCM Request
=======================
Package Name: nodejs-tiny-lr-fork
Short Description: A tiny LiveReload server implementation you can spawn in the background
Owners: jamielinux patches
Branches: f19 f20 el6
InitialCC:

Comment 5 Gwyn Ciesla 2014-03-31 18:41:58 UTC
Git done (by process-git-requests).


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.