[Bug 1177857] Review Request: libsedml - Library that fully supports SED-ML for SBML

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1177857



--- Comment #11 from Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> ---
%description: please expand SED-ML abbreviation and/or add a few words
explaining what this package does in a way that is understandable for a lay
person.

%package devel %description: it's enough to say
This package contains headers for %{name}.

Shouldn't python-SEDML be python-libsedml? This would match python-sbml.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#Addon_Packages_.28python_modules.29
says: "When in doubt, use the name of the module that you type to import it in
a script."

Also java-libsedml instead of java-SEDML? I think using capitalized SEDML only
makes sense if the actual module name contains that. For ruby, perl, R that is
true, for other bindings not.

What about python3 subpackage?

- Packages have proper BuildRequires/Requires on jpackage-utils
Binary package needs that according to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#BuildRequires_and_Requires.

According to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Mono, gacutil should be
called in %build.

I'd use the same license and doc dirs for all subpackages: %global _docdir_fmt
%{name}.

Shouldn't libsedml-sharp require mono-core?

Use %make_install macro to replace make DESTDIR=$RPM_BUILD_ROOT install ?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]