Re: RFS: xxxterm
Hi Paul,
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 11:31:40AM +0100, Paul Wise wrote:
> Here is a review of your package:
Thank you lot for your time!
> I would personally wrap the build-deps one package per line, since it
> makes it easier to see what changed.
Ok, I'll do that.
> Your watch file is overly generic, I would suggest using this instead:
>
> http://opensource.conformal.com/snapshots/xxxterm/xxxterm-([\d\.]+)\.tgz
No problem.
> There is a new upstream release (1.517) available.
Ups. I'll work on that one :-)
> Please forward your patches upstream if you haven't already. You can
> use the Forwarded DEP-3 header to indicate where they have been
> forwarded to.
>
> http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
I used this header before but as I started managing the package using git
all the patches have been regenerated and this information was lost. I'll
try to add it back.
Also, *all* the patches have been sent upstream. Some of them have been
accepted (and removed from the debian/patches, obviously), others have
been discarded.
> For the two that indicate upstream does not want them, you could
> instead send a patch to make these build-time configurable.
Sorry, but I don't think that's an option upstream will take. For
example, the default homepage of the upstream version is a website of a
company. One of the patches changes this to a blank page and has been
discarded by upstream.
> It would seem like a good idea to install the icon in the standard
> paths, you might want to send upstream a patch for that.
I can add a patch to do this, but again I don't think upstream would be
interested. Their target OS is OpenBSD; and they have discarded similar
patches before (for example, the one to change the resources directory).
> Where does debian/xxxterm.upstream-changelog come from? Maybe you
> could get upstream to start publishing it in their tarballs as a NEWS
> file?
This file is built from information taken from the official forum:
https://opensource.conformal.com/fluxbb/viewforum.php?id=8
Again, I may propose upstream to add this file but if you take a look at
the thread in the forum:
https://opensource.conformal.com/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=160
You'll see that upstream reply to a similar question is: "cvs has a
built-in changelog". Thus, I guess they would give me a similar answer.
> I wonder about the copyright on the icon, it looks like a derivative
> work of an image that seems to have spread around the Internet. I am
> betting that upstream just took it from somewhere and removed parts of
> it.
I have discussed this already with Kilian Krause and Benoit Knecht, and
also with the upstream authors.
So, based on information provided by upstream, these icons were created by
them (upstreams) and the license is CC BY. I do have (personal) emails
discussing this with upstreams, but obviously I have no evidences of any of
this.
Package has been built with the assumption that information provided by
upstreams is correct. Anyway, I'm OK to just drop these icons or replace
them by some other icons already shipped with Debian.
Is this enough for you to accept these icons as they are?
[...]
> In any case I don''t think it is an appropriate icon for a web browser.
What about the name, is it appropriate for a web browser? :-)
Cheers,
--
Luis Henriques
Reply to: