[Bug 585817] Review Request: R-caTools - Moving window statistics, GIF, Base64, ROC AUC, etc

[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=585817

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

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

--- Comment #2 from Pierre-YvesChibon <pingou at pingoured.fr> 2010-05-12 04:12:57 EDT ---
* source files match upstream:
   sha1sum caTools_1.10.tar.gz 
e9f393dbfe3928448ccdc40dd011987d73acce9b  caTools_1.10.tar.gz
   sha1sum rpmbuild/SOURCES/caTools_1.10.tar.gz 
e9f393dbfe3928448ccdc40dd011987d73acce9b  rpmbuild/SOURCES/caTools_1.10.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 koji (
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=2182053 ).
-  Although the build produces a lot of warnings, you might want to contact
upstream to see if you can arrange some of these.

* package installs properly
* example from ?caTools runs properly
* rpmlint produces 2 warnings, safe to ignore (spelling).
  3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 2 warnings.
* final provides and requires are sane
* %check is present and all tests pass.
-  It seems to produce a WARNING on the cross-reference test, not a blocker
though

* 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.


** 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.