Bug 584988 - Review Request: R-lme4 - Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes
Summary: Review Request: R-lme4 - Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: Package Review
Version: rawhide
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Pierre-YvesChibon
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-04-22 20:26 UTC by josef radinger
Modified: 2010-11-16 14:42 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-11-16 14:42:25 UTC
Type: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description josef radinger 2010-04-22 20:26:49 UTC
Spec URL: http://www.nosuchhost.net/~cheese/fedora/packages/devel/R-lme4.spec
SRPM URL: 
http://www.nosuchhost.net/~cheese/fedora/packages/devel/R-lme4-0.999375-3.fc12.src.rpm
Description: 
Fit linear and generalized linear mixed-effects models

Comment 1 Pierre-YvesChibon 2010-04-28 09:49:03 UTC
Having a quick look at it:

- Fix version
  The version of this package is 0.999375.33 not 0.999375 cf 
  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:R#R_version
- Fix %changelog
  Please update the format of the changelog, the version-release should be on the same line as the changelog entree.
- Fix Requires
  You might want to have Requires: R-core >= %{Rversion} instead of just R

- Fix %check
Although, this show that there are dependencies missing for this package:
> Packages required but not available:
>  mlmRev MEMSS

Comment 2 josef radinger 2010-04-30 19:05:02 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Having a quick look at it:
> 
> - Fix version
>   The version of this package is 0.999375.33 not 0.999375 cf 
>   http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:R#R_version
agreed

> - Fix %changelog
>   Please update the format of the changelog, the version-release should be on
> the same line as the changelog entree.
according to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Changelogs
allowed.

> - Fix Requires
>   You might want to have Requires: R-core >= %{Rversion} instead of just R
agreed

> - Fix %check
> Although, this show that there are dependencies missing for this package:
> > Packages required but not available:
> >  mlmRev MEMSS    
those are only suggestions for the check and mlmRev has a dependency on R-lme4 -> circular dependency. should have noted that in the spec.

new SRPM:
http://www.nosuchhost.net/~cheese/fedora/packages/devel/R-lme4-0.999375.33-4.fc12.src.rpm

Comment 3 Pierre-YvesChibon 2010-04-30 20:59:09 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > - Fix %check
> > Although, this show that there are dependencies missing for this package:
> > > Packages required but not available:
> > >  mlmRev MEMSS    
> those are only suggestions for the check and mlmRev has a dependency on R-lme4
> -> circular dependency. should have noted that in the spec.

Please see if you can submit then for review & integration. We normally package both REQUIRES and SUGGESTS. See what is the strongest dependency between R-lme4 and R-mlmRev and keep that one (commenting indeed in the spec for the other one).

Since you are already sponsored I will review the package I already looked at. I will try to do it in the coming days.

Comment 4 josef radinger 2010-05-03 11:46:00 UTC
you mean i shall create additional packages (the SUGGESTS) and decide which buildrequire really needs to be there to correctly build?

eg:
buildrequires from A ->B, but not from B->A

Comment 5 Pierre-YvesChibon 2010-05-03 12:03:50 UTC
(In reply to comment #4)
> you mean i shall create additional packages (the SUGGESTS) and decide which
> buildrequire really needs to be there to correctly build?
yes, this is normally the way I/we do it.

> eg:
> buildrequires from A ->B, but not from B->A    
Then you can leave %check in one, and remove it (with explanation in the spec) from the other one.

Comment 6 Pierre-YvesChibon 2010-05-06 18:08:54 UTC
hm you also miss the BR tex(latex) here

Comment 7 josef radinger 2010-05-08 12:54:32 UTC
tex(latex) fixed, the rest still to come

Comment 8 Pierre-YvesChibon 2010-09-21 18:11:45 UTC
ping ? Shall we close or do you still want to go ?

Comment 9 Pierre-YvesChibon 2010-11-16 14:42:25 UTC
I am closing this, almost two months without reply.


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