Bug#917624: RFS: ncurses-hexedit/0.9.7+orig-6
On 31/12/18 7:54 am, Dmitry Bogatov wrote:
>
> control: owner -1 kaction@debian.org
>
> [2018-12-29 23:48] Carlos Maddela <e7appew@gmail.com>
>> Dear mentors,
>>
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ncurses-hexedit"
>>
>> * Package name : ncurses-hexedit
>> Version : 0.9.7+orig-6
>> Upstream Author : Adam Rogoyski <adam@rogoyski.com>
>> * URL : http://www.rogoyski.com/adam/programs/hexedit/
>> * License : GPL-2.0+
>> Section : editors
>>
>> It builds this binary package:
>>
>> ncurses-hexedit - Edit files/disks in hex, ASCII and EBCDIC
>>
>> To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL:
>>
>> https://mentors.debian.net/package/ncurses-hexedit
>>
>>
>> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
>>
>> dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/ncurses-hexedit/ncurses-hexedit_0.9.7+orig-6.dsc
>
> I believe it should be `dget -ux'. In general, sponsor does not have
> sponsoree's key in his keyring. Could you please file bug aganist
> mentors.debian.net about it and add me in CC?
>
>> Changes since the last upload:
>>
>> * Set "Rules-Requires-Root: no".
>> * Simplify process by which mutable files are backed up and restored.
>
> I like this idea. Thank you.
>
>> * Allow build to be as verbose as possible.
>> * Fix spelling errors detected by lintian and mwic.
>> * Indicate compliance with Debian Policy 4.3.0.
>
> Looks fine. Uploaded. But what does +orig means in version?
>
When I took over as maintainer, I wanted to know why the project's
original tarball in Debian differed from that of the one available
upstream. I found that they only differed in the way that the top level
directory was named. From what I gather, this was necessary for Debian's
earlier build system, as documented here:
https://wiki.debian.org/Packaging/Intro. See Q&A for "do we need to
repack the original tarball if it doesn't contains a properly named
foo-1.0 folder?" Since, it's no longer necessary to repack the original
tarball, I thought it would be best to revert to using the original
upstream tarball without any changes. However, the only way I could do
so was to upload it with a higher version number, hence the +orig. If in
the unlikely event that a new upstream version were to be released, the
+orig can be dropped once again.
Reply to: