[Bug 514984] Review Request: R-AnnotationDbi - Annotation Database Interface

[bugzilla at redhat.com]

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.


https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=514984


Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED
         AssignedTo|nobody at fedoraproject.org    |tibbs at math.uh.edu
               Flag|                            |fedora-review+




--- Comment #3 from Jason Tibbitts <tibbs at math.uh.edu>  2009-08-01 14:31:05 EDT ---
That's better.  Builds fine, rpmlint has only the usual two complaints.

There's a stray space in your description.  (Minor, I know.)

I agree about the disabling of the check section; it would require build
dependencies on a significant number of packages, most of which don't seem to
be part of Fedora and almost all of which look to be large.

* source files match upstream.  sha256sum:                    
   80939b4fee2e5cc91186f67e878160be7dee199ab9e6a3fed5fb275d5acb0991  
   AnnotationDbi_1.6.1.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 (rawhide, x86_64).
* package installs properly.
* rpmlint has acceptable complaints.
* final provides and requires are sane:
   R-AnnotationDbi = 1.6.1-1.fc12
  =
   /bin/sh
   R
   R >= 2.9.0
   R-Biobase
   R-DBI
   R-RSQLite
   R-methods
   R-utils

* owns the directories it creates.
* doesn't own any directories it shouldn't.
* no duplicates in %files.
* file permissions are appropriate.
* no generically named files
* scriptlets are OK (R package registration)
* code, not content.
* documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary.
* %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package.

APPROVED

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.