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: R-tkWidgets-1.14.0 - Widgets to provide user interfaces https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=241082 ------- Additional Comments From tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx 2007-09-29 18:15 EST ------- Went ahead and knocked DynDoc out and stuck it in a local repo so I can review this. The License: tag needs a tweak for the new scheme. Unfortunately, I can't figure out what it might be; there's no actual mention of the LGPL in the tarball apart from the DESCRIPTION file which just says "License: LGPL". The code itself has unpleasant "All rights reserved" copyright notices. I think you will need to ping upstream and see if they can clarify. I note ths doesn't build without R-DynDoc, but does it have any runtime requirements on it? Similarly for R-widgetTools and the tcl/tk stuff. Currently you can install this with only R being present on the system, but I don't know if it will actually work. * source files match upstream: 226255e21582779ec7a2df43eecf58d19fb87f1bc9fb94e4f554b834d409fed5 tkWidgets_1.14.0.tar.gz * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK. * dist tag is present. * build root is OK. ? license field matches the actual license. ? license is open source-compatible. * license text not included upstream. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (development, x86_64). * package installs properly * rpmlint is sufficiently silent. X final provides and requires are missing some dependencies: R-tkWidgets = 1.14.0-4.fc8 = /bin/sh R * %check is present but I'm not sure there are any tests to run. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets are OK (R module registration) * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -docs subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/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