Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at

Bug 183927

Summary: Review Request: R-wavethresh - R package for wavelets
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: José Matos <jamatos>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Jason Tibbitts <j>
Status: CLOSED NEXTRELEASE QA Contact: Fedora Package Reviews List <fedora-package-review>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhide   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-03-08 23:32:31 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 163779    

Description José Matos 2006-03-03 20:10:49 UTC
Spec Name or Url:
SRPM Name or Url:
Description: Software to perform 1-d and 2-d wavelet statistics and transforms

Comment 1 Jason Tibbitts 2006-03-07 23:49:42 UTC
This fares a bit better than R-waveslim.  rpmlint says:

W: R-wavethresh invalid-license GPL version 2 or later
W: R-wavethresh no-documentation

We have no standards for R package naming, but R-packagename is reasonable.
The specfile is clean and understandable.
The source matches upstream.
Package dependencies are sane.
Package builds in mock.

rpmlint finds no documentation, but all supplied documentation is part of R's
internal help system, so this isn't a blocker.

rpmlint doesn't like the License: tag.  I have asked on the extras list whether
it is acceptable or not.

Comment 2 José Matos 2006-03-08 09:41:20 UTC
I have modified the package to fill those issues: 
* Wed Mar  8 2006 Jose' Matos <> - 2.2-2 
- Rename License to simply GPL, added DESCRIPTION to %%doc 
New package can be found: 

Comment 3 Jason Tibbitts 2006-03-08 20:28:17 UTC
The license tag is now acceptable and as a bonus we have a bit of documentation.
 rpmlint is placated and everything looks great.


Comment 4 José Matos 2006-03-08 23:32:31 UTC
Build on target fedora-development-extras succeeded.