[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ON_QA |CLOSED Resolution|--- |ERRATA Last Closed||2012-07-27 21:18:12 --- Comment #11 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 --- Comment #12 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA --- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 testing repository. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 --- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc16 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 --- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System upda...@fedoraproject.org --- R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-2.fc17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267
--- Comment #2 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me ---
Apart from the duplicated Requires line, everything else is fine if you
intend to support RHEL 5. If not, please see the checklist below and remove the
relevant parts from the spec.
Package Review
==
Key:
- = N/A
x = Pass
! = Fail
? = Not evaluated
Generic
[x]: MUST Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets
other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging
Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at
least one supported primary architecture.
[-]: MUST %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise.
[x]: MUST All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any
that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines.
[!]: MUST Buildroot is not present
Note: Buildroot is not needed unless packager plans to package for EPEL5
[x]: MUST Package contains no bundled libraries.
[x]: MUST Changelog in prescribed format.
[!]: MUST Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT)
Note: Clean is needed only if supporting EPEL
[x]: MUST Sources contain only permissible code or content.
[!]: MUST Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm 4.4
Note: defattr() present in %files section. This is OK if packaging
for EPEL5. Otherwise not needed
[x]: MUST Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time.
[x]: MUST Package requires other packages for directories it uses.
[x]: MUST Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime.
[x]: MUST Package is not known to require ExcludeArch.
[x]: MUST Permissions on files are set properly.
[x]: MUST Package does not contain duplicates in %files.
[x]: MUST Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags.
[!]: MUST Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the
beginning of %install.
Note: rm -rf is only needed if supporting EPEL5
[-]: MUST Large documentation files are in a -doc subpackage, if required.
[-]: MUST If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package is included in %doc.
[x]: MUST License field in the package spec file matches the actual license.
[x]: MUST Package consistently uses macros (instead of hard-coded directory
names).
[x]: MUST Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines.
[x]: MUST Package does not generate any conflict.
[x]: MUST Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target.
[x]: MUST Package must own all directories that it creates.
[x]: MUST Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages.
[x]: MUST Package installs properly.
[!]: MUST Requires correct, justified where necessary.
[!]: MUST Rpmlint output is silent.
rpmlint R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-1.fc17.noarch.rpm
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 0 warnings.
rpmlint R-BiocGenerics-0.2.0-1.fc17.src.rpm
R-BiocGenerics.src:39: W: macro-in-comment %check
R-BiocGenerics.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{_bindir}
R-BiocGenerics.src:40: W: macro-in-comment %{packname}
1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 0 errors, 3 warnings.
[x]: MUST Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as
provided in the spec URL.
/home/michel/sources/fedora/reviews/821267/BiocGenerics_0.2.0.tar.gz :
MD5SUM this package : e99858faa90d26099c933712ed80dd0c
MD5SUM upstream package : e99858faa90d26099c933712ed80dd0c
[x]: MUST Spec file is legible and written in American English.
[x]: MUST Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format
%{name}.spec.
[-]: MUST Package contains a SysV-style init script if in need of one.
[x]: MUST File names are valid UTF-8.
[-]: MUST Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise.
[x]: SHOULD Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock.
[!]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a
separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to
include it.
[x]: SHOULD Dist tag is present.
[x]: SHOULD No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin,
/usr/sbin.
[x]: SHOULD Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q
--requires).
[?]: SHOULD Package functions as described.
[x]: SHOULD Package does not include license text files separate from
upstream.
[x]: SHOULD SourceX is a working URL.
[-]: SHOULD Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains
translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
[x]: SHOULD Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported
architectures.
[!]: SHOULD %check is present and all tests pass.
[-]: SHOULD Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed
files.
[x]: SHOULD Spec use %global instead
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 --- Comment #3 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me --- Oh, and this: [!]: SHOULD If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. I could find no license text in the source archive -- if you have emailed upstream about it, please make a note above the license field in the spec to that effect (preferably with the URL of the mailing list post) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 --- Comment #4 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr --- I won't maintain this package in EPEL, but since none of these are real blockers, I will clean the spec and bump the release at import (if that's ok with you). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me changed: What|Removed |Added Flags|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Comment #5 from Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me --- That's fine with me -- APPROVED -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr changed: What|Removed |Added Flags||fedora-cvs? --- Comment #6 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr --- New Package SCM Request === Package Name: R-BiocGenerics Short Description: Generic functions for Bioconductor Owners: pingou Branches: F17, F16 InitialCC: -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 --- Comment #7 from Jon Ciesla limburg...@gmail.com --- Git done (by process-git-requests). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=821267 Michel Alexandre Salim michel+...@sylvestre.me changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |ASSIGNED CC||michel+...@sylvestre.me Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|michel+...@sylvestre.me Flags||fedora-review? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
[Bug 821267] Review Request: R-BiocGenerics - Generic functions for Bioconductor
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=821267 --- Comment #1 from Pierre-YvesChibon pin...@pingoured.fr 2012-05-13 13:46:31 EDT --- This package built on koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4074290 -- 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. ___ package-review mailing list package-review@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
