https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1672047 --- Comment #5 from Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) <sanjay.ankur@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #3) > (In reply to Ankur Sinha (FranciscoD) from comment #2) > > It's Boost 1.51 (vs Boost 1.66 on Fedora), and eigen3-3.1.1 (vs > eigen3-3.3.7 on Fedora) that is not used maybe. > Unbundling could be a bad idea. Please file a ticket upstream and add the URL to the spec as a comment. > > > * zlib (in Fedora) > > zlib is not used and compilation fails if enable it; probably cannot be > unbundled too. I see you've used zlib-devel in the spec. I expect this has been sorted? > > * SFMT (not in Fedora, but looks simple to package) Please comment in the spec that this particular library and the features it provides to smoldyn are currently unavailable. > > > > - Do the Vcell etc features require Vcell to be packaged already? If not, > > that can be enabled. Vcell is on our list, but it's a web app: > > https://pagure.io/neuro-sig/NeuroFedora/issue/213 > > - VTK support can be enabled. It's in Fedora. > > Vcell and VTK support are disabled by default and fail if enabled. Need > work. Uh---please file a ticket upstream about this too (and mention it in the spec). > > - PDE support can be enabled. I can't find a PDE software, but here's Kairos > > which also includes the same Io.cpp and Io.h files that this does: > > https://github.com/martinjrobins/Kairos/tree/master/src I wonder if they've > > been bundled there too. (It's only two files, so bundling them isn't too > > bad) > > > > - Shouldn't the main package also contain a versioned soname that the binary > > will use? Is smoldyn meant to be used as a library---otherwise the devel > > package is not needed either. > > Not needed. It's a private library, not shared. If you are sure that it's a private library (nothing will link against it), the -devel package should not be provided, no? The soname should be in the main package, and examples and headers not installed at all. What do you think? > > > > - Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Large could be size > > (~1MB) or number of files. > > Note: Documentation size is 91258880 bytes in 1812 files. > > See: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#PackageDocumentation > > ^ All the docs including the examples can go in the docs package. Otherwise > > the > > devel package becomes very large. > > Examples are not documentation, they're configuration files for testing. If they are tests for the tool and will not be used by any other software, they do not need to be provided in any package either (like the -devel package). > > > > > - Please do not include a license file if upstream has not provided it. We > > should file a bug upstream asking them to do include it. > > Why not? > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/LicensingGuidelines/#_license_text > I will mail to upstream about. Yes. As the guideline says, we should first attempt the get upstream to provide it. Only if they are unresponsive or refuse, should us packagers consider including a copy ourselves. I think filing another issue upstream and mentioning it in the spec would be safer too. Re-running fedora-review on the updated spec/srpm now. -- 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 To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
