[Bug 244237] Review Request: R-pls - Multivariate regression by PLSR and PCR
bugzilla at redhat.com
bugzilla at redhat.com
Thu Jan 17 20:58:28 UTC 2008
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: R-pls - Multivariate regression by PLSR and PCR
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=244237
tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+
------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu 2008-01-17 15:58 EST -------
The only thing I would suggest is that you consider packaging the CHANGES
document, since it seems to be relevant and up-to-date.
* source files match upstream:
71108e2b7beb7287cef6a5f68c1f4c9e3d2aebf71886b200c7291b4ebf4453e6
pls_2.1-0.tar.gz
* package meets naming and versioning guidelines.
* specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently.
* summary is OK.
* description is OK.
* dist tag is present.
* build root is OK.
* license field matches the actual license.
* license is open source-compatible.
* license text not included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly
* rpmlint has only the usual complaints
* final provides and requires are sane:
R-pls = 2.1-1.fc9
=
/bin/sh
R
* %check is present and all tests (as far as I can tell).
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* scriptlets OK (R package installation)
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
APPROVED
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact.
More information about the Fedora-package-review
mailing list