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 cgoorah@xxxxxxxxxxxx 2006-12-28 07:09 EST ------- (In reply to comment #3) > I probably need to add a README.Fedora to the -bsp subpackage stating that the > libBSP support isn't available yet. Or perhaps document it somewhere in the fedoraproject.org/wiki :) Since in the /usr/share/doc/ScientificPython-mpi-2.6/README.MPI, it states, The module Scientific.MPI is documented in the ScientificPython manual. The main purpose of this file is to explain how to install ScientificPython with MPI support.[...] You could possibly add useful information from that file to the wiki page without those installation notes. Then /usr/share/doc/ScientificPython-mpi-2.6/README.MPI might be useless, afterwards /usr/share/doc/ScientificPython-mpi-2.6/impipython could be at /usr/bin/impipython What do you think ? Since, I'm concerned too with scientific packages at Fedora, possibly we could gather some packagers (scientific packages) to document their changes during packaging on the wiki. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SIGs/SciTech We already have SciTech SIG, we could bring it to life, just like the PHP SIG is doing a great job. And help each other during reviews, troubleshooting, etc... -- 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