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 2006-12-29 01:49 EST ------- Here is the updated srpm to address outstanding issues. PyQt requires has been fixed as well as removal of redudant requires: openmpi-libs and netcdf. I've re-integrated the mpi and bsp subpackages back into the main package. Picking up the depchain for openmpi-libs isn't a significant burden. But I still feel its appropriate to leave the Qt and tk toolkit modules as subpackages. I've also spun up a fedora-specific impipython.sh file to replace the upstream one. It has the correct filepath information generated at package buildtime. It's still included as a doc file, because you still have to hand edit it for the number or processors you want to run it with via mpirun. You'll notice I added a nice verbose comment header in the script explaining what its there for. This is my best effort to cover all the problems pointed out by Chitlesh. Is there anything else I need to fix? I've look a bit more at the Visualization subdirectory of included python code. At the moment they pretty much require someone to have additional non Fedora space items installs to operate correctly. They do have runtime detection of the needed helper programs so they don't fall over and die with python tracebacks. They should exit gracefully and tell you you don't have the needed additional software installed. I'm still inclined to include them since they do no harm, but I'm not sure if I should split this off as a subpackage. There is no real gain in splitting them off as a subpackage at the moment. If at some point we get the 3d visualization programs in Fedora packaging space we may consider it if we want to make one the 3d visualization stacks a hard requirement on the package, I don't consider this a blocker issue, but I'm open to dealing with this a different way if the reviewer(s) think otherwise. SRPM: http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/ScientificPython/ScientificPython-2.6-5.src.rpm Spec: http://jspaleta.thecodergeek.com/Fedora%20SRPMS/ScientificPython/ScientificPython.spec Changelog: * Thu Dec 28 2006 Jef Spaleta <jspaleta@xxxxxxxxx> 2.6-5 - remove mpi and bsp subpackages. On more thought, - it makes more sense to have the parallel computing items - in the main package. - Added inline impipython.sh reference script - Replaces upstreams impipython reference file - This will have the correct path statements generated at - package buildtime. Still included as a doc item -- 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