Bug 166438

Summary:	Review Request: R-mAr
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	José Matos <jamatos>
Component:	Package Review	Assignee:	Tom "spot" Callaway <tcallawa>
Status:	CLOSED NEXTRELEASE	QA Contact:	David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	rawhide	CC:	fedora-extras-list
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
URL:	http://cran.r-project.org/contrib/main/
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2005-10-06 12:54:43 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	163779

Description José Matos 2005-08-21 10:05:06 UTC

Spec Name or Url: http://www.fc.up.pt/pessoas/jamatos/R-mAr.spec
SRPM Name or Url: http://www.fc.up.pt/pessoas/jamatos/R-mAr-1.1-1.src.rpm
Description:
R package:
An R add-on package for estimation of multivariate AR models through a
computationally-efficient stepwise least-squares algorithm (Neumaier
and Schneider, 2001); the procedure is of particular interest for
high-dimensional data without missing values such as geophysical
fields.

Comment 1 José Matos 2005-09-09 10:10:25 UTC

Same version, new location:   
   
http://www.fc.up.pt/pessoas/jamatos/fedora-extras/R-mAr.spec 
http://www.fc.up.pt/pessoas/jamatos/fedora-extras/R-mAr-1.1-1.src.rpm 
 
As soon as I get a review of this package I will submit more R packages 
that are in the queue since its packaging it is mostly similar.

Comment 2 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-10-05 17:00:18 UTC

Agreed. This looks exactly like the template I was using for the CRAN packages I
had in the queue.

The only difference is that I also have:

%check
%{_bindir}/R CMD check %{packname}

I also have tetex-latex as a BuildRequires, since it seems to need it for many
packages to generate the docs.

Comment 3 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-10-05 17:35:56 UTC

Minor changes:
%doc DESCRIPTION COPYING doesn't seem to be needed as these files end up in
%{_libdir}/R/library/%{packname} as part of the install process.

%check should be:

cd ..;%{_bindir}/R CMD check %{packname}

Comment 4 Tom "spot" Callaway 2005-10-05 17:41:04 UTC

With the changes I describe above applied...

Good:

- rpmlint checks return:
W: R-mAr invalid-license GPL version 2 or newer
(rpmlint making noise)
E: R-mAr no-binary
E: R-mAr only-non-binary-in-usr-lib
(safe to ignore for R packages)
W: R-mAr no-documentation
W: R-mAr dangerous-command-in-%post perl
W: R-mAr dangerous-command-in-%postun perl
(safe to ignore)

- package meets naming guidelines
- package meets packaging guidelines
- license (GPL) OK, text included, matches source
- spec file legible, in am. english
- source matches upstream
- package compiles on devel (x86)
- no missing BR
- no unnecessary BR
- no locales
- not relocatable
- owns all directories that it creates
- no duplicate files
- permissions ok
- %clean ok
- macro use consistent
- code, not content
- no need for -docs
- nothing in %doc
- no need for .desktop file

APPROVED, assuming my changes are applied (BR: tetex-latex, no duplication of
docs, use of %check).

With this sort of a template, these packages should be quick to review. :)

Comment 5 José Matos 2005-10-06 12:11:58 UTC

I have applied all your suggestions and I have imported the package. 
 
Thank you.

Comment 6 José Matos 2005-10-06 12:54:43 UTC

Build on target development succeeded.