https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1882999 José Matos <jamatos@xxxxxxxx> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC| |jamatos@xxxxxxxx Assignee|nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |jamatos@xxxxxxxx Flags| |fedora-review+ --- Comment #2 from José Matos <jamatos@xxxxxxxx> --- The license is correct and appropriated for Fedora. The spec file follows the Fedora package guidelines. In this cases these are the fedora-review complaints: Issues: ======= - Package have the default element marked as %%doc :DESCRIPTION - Package requires R-core. - If your application is a C or C++ application you must list a BuildRequires against gcc, gcc-c++ or clang. Note: No gcc, gcc-c++ or clang found in BuildRequires See: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/C_and_C++/ The first is a bug as DESCRIPTION is not marked as %doc and the others are as intended. I must confess that I found the description puzzling due to the last sentence. "This version calls lp_solve version 5.5." My problem is with "calls" this is very overloaded here. Essentially R-lpSolve has a copy of lp_Solve and provides an R interface to it. Since the code is 15 years old I think that it is OK. "Although practicality beats purity." (Zen of Python) So the package is approved.  -- 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://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
