[Bug 521671] Review Request: R-plyr - Tools for splitting, applying, and combining data in R

[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.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=521671





--- Comment #2 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-09-17 01:27:55 EDT ---
It's just not my week.  Sorry about that.

I can't see anywhere in the source or the upstream web site that indicates
which version of the GPL applies.  DESCRIPTION and the upstream web site just
say "GPL".  The source code has no license information at all.  According to
the GPL, this means we can choose any version, so "License: GPL+" is the proper
thing to use, unless you can get clarification from upstream (which you should
try to do).

I don't think a dependency on "R >= R-2.8" does anything useful.  A proper
versioned dependency  would be "R >= 2.8".  No supported Fedora version shipped
with anything older than 2.8, but I'm not sure what might have been in some
ancient version of EPEL so I suppose a versioned dependency could be necessary.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:
   dfd2ef9e23e201f2f7e4073c57701092e7b6d25960c38802d6f0527b20765898  
   plyr_0.1.9.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 acceptable complaints.
? final provides and requires are sane:
   R-plyr = 0.1.9-2.fc12
  =
   /bin/sh
   R
?  R >= R-2.8
   R-RUnit
   R-abind
   R-tcltk

* %check is necessarily disabled.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* scriptlets are  OK (R module registration).
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

-- 
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.