[Bug 452150] Review Request: swarp - Tool that resamples and co-adds together FITS images

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

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: swarp - Tool that resamples and co-adds together FITS images


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=452150


tibbs at math.uh.edu changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Flag|fedora-review?              |fedora-review+




------- Additional Comments From tibbs at math.uh.edu  2008-06-19 22:03 EST -------
Two observations:

The pdf file is 1.5MB and three times the size of the rest of the package.  Did
you consider putting it in a separate package?   I don't think it's a
requirement but you know best how this package will be used.

%{__mkdir_p} %{buildroot}%{_datadir}/%{name} at the end of %install seems to be
superfluous, as that directory is created (and swarp.xsl is installed there) by
the install process.  It seems to be harmless, though.

I don't think either of these are blockers, though.

* source files match upstream:
   34e815d44f3b1c3c7bfdeb01bbdcf32d1eac239527a0937c3ed2b6f7be34bcee  
   swarp-2.17.1.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.
 license text included in package.
* latest version is being packaged.
* BuildRequires are proper (none).
* compiler flags are appropriate.
* %clean is present.
* package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* debuginfo package looks complete.
* rpmlint is silent.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   swarp = 2.17.1-1.fc10
  =
   (no non-glibc dependencies)
* %check is not present; no test suite upstream.  There is a test directory 
  containing one fits file, but it's not immediately clear what should be done 
  with it.  I ran the executable and gave it the test file and it did... 
  something, without crashing, and didn't complain about it.
* no shared libraries are added to the regular linker search paths.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no scriptlets present.
* code, not content.
? documentation is 3x the rest of the package.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.
* no headers.
* no pkgconfig files.
* no static libraries.
* no libtool .la files.

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.