Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug.
Summary: Review Request: gmsh - finite element grid generator https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=753577 Summary: Review Request: gmsh - finite element grid generator Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: unspecified Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [email protected] ReportedBy: [email protected] QAContact: [email protected] CC: [email protected], [email protected] Classification: Fedora Story Points: --- Type: --- Spec URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4532412/RPMS/gmsh.spec SRPM URL: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4532412/RPMS/gmsh-2.5.0-4.fc16.src.rpm Description: Gmsh is a 3D finite element grid generator with a build-in CAD engine and post-processor. Gmsh is built around four modules: geometry, mesh, solver and post-processing. Gmsh has GUI and CLI and can be used as a library for 3rd party programs. Hi folks, I've packaged Gmsh and need a review. This is my first package, so I need a sponsor. I did my best to meet Fedora packaging guidelines, but would really appreciate detailed review. The main question I'd like to advice about - how to split gmsh into subpackages correctly. Gmsh is organized like this: - Separate binary that needs nothing to run properly - Shared library that is required for linking 3rd party programs only - Headers, demos, tutorials I decided to split it this way: - gmsh package with binary - gmsh-libs with shared libraries - gmsh-devel with headers and symlinks to so-files, it requires gmsh-libs (not gmsh) - gmsh-demos with tutorials and so on Does it look reasonable? rpmlint has nothing against it, but I'd really appreciate human advice. -- 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 [email protected] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review
