[Bug 591424] Review Request: R-statmod - Statistical modeling

[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=591424

Pierre-YvesChibon <pingou at pingoured.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |pingou at pingoured.fr
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |pingou at pingoured.fr
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+

--- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon <pingou at pingoured.fr> 2010-05-12 05:23:32 EDT ---
* source files match upstream:
   sha1sum statmod_1.4.6.tar.gz 
e488bfca55216c1fe3f8f5483fd4ec096d17027a  statmod_1.4.6.tar.gz
   sha1sum rpmbuild/SOURCES/statmod_1.4.6.tar.gz 
e488bfca55216c1fe3f8f5483fd4ec096d17027a  rpmbuild/SOURCES/statmod_1.4.6.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 is included upstream.
* latest version is being packaged.
- BuildRequires are proper.
  tex(latex) should be in the BR (needed for the man page)

* %clean is present.
* package builds in koji (
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2182193 ).
* package installs properly
* test runs properly (?statmod::tweedie)
* rpmlint produces 2 warnings, safe to ignore (spelling).
  2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.

* final provides and requires are sane
* %check is *not* present for circular dependency issue.
* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

I trust you can correct the BR before importing the package into the CVS.

** 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.