Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ScientificPython - a collection of Python modules that are useful for scientific computing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220766 ------- Additional Comments From jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx 2006-12-27 15:08 EST ------- (In reply to comment #2) I'll clean up the descriptive tag crap before I submit. > shouldn't the sub packages be a dependency of the ScientificPython package ? > No, its the other way around. Subpackages depend on the main package. I broke these out as sub-packages specifically because they drag in additional requirements which may or may not be needed and as a result they should be optional. This is a codebase aimed at people writing homebrew scientific simulation code, not an end-user application. I expect everyone using this to have enough grey matter to look for subpackages as needed. I've no desire to delibrately force all subpackages to install dragging in tk and qt and openmpi on every system, systems which be delibrately streamlined for batched scientific computing. You'll notice this sort of thing is already done for python-matplotlib and python-matplotlib-tk so I'm not setting a precendent here. > you missed Doc/BSP_Tutorial.pdf in ScientificPython-doc package Crap thats suppose to be in -BSP subpackage, I missed it when I split off BSP. I'm on the fence about the BSP stuff in general because libBSP is not available in Fedora yet. I'm not even sure what the licensing conditions on libBSP are. The only reason I'm including the BSP python modules at all is because ScientificPython includes a virtual BSP utility which allows you to simulate the use of the BSP protocal on a single processor without the need of libBSP. Cute, but I'm not sure how useful packaging that actually is. Since I've no experience with libBSP installs yet I wasn't going to hold up packaging ScientificPython for this optional functionality. I'm primarily interested in the provided netCDF support, and secondarily the mpi support. I probably need to add a README.Fedora to the -bsp subpackage stating that the libBSP support isn't available yet. -jef -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review