Bug#658235: RFS: libjreen, the xmpp library (3rd try, 2 months later)
Vsevolod Velichko wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "libjreen" (and do this for
> the 3rd time, because I've got no answer, neither positive nor
> negative since November 2011).
> * Package name : libjreen
> Version : 1.0.1-1
> Upstream Author : Ruslan Nigmatullin <email@example.com>
> * URL : http://qutim.org/jreen
> * License : GPL2+
> Section : libs
> It builds those binary packages:
> libjreen-dev - powerful Jabber/XMPP library - development files
> libjreen1 - powerful Jabber/XMPP library implemented in Qt/C++
I took a look at your package, here are a few things you may want to
- Some warnings from lintian:
I: libjreen source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field "section" in package libjreen1
P: libjreen source: unversioned-copyright-format-uri http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5
I: libjreen1: no-symbols-control-file usr/lib/libjreen.so.1.0.1
- In debian/control, your long description repeats the synopsis, and
it doesn't consist of full sentences. See  for guidelines about
writing good descriptions.
If you're not using a VCS, you should remove those commented-out
- In debian/rules, the dh_installchangelogs override isn't needed;
debhelper will pick up the upstream changelog automatically.
The dh_auto_install override could also be replaced by using
debian/<package>.install files (see dh_install(1) for details).
- In debian/copyright, you should use the predefined short names for
licenses; what you call "MIT/X11 (BSD Like)" is the Expat license.
And even though it's more cosmetic than anything, GPL-2.0+ could be
replaced by GPL-2+.
I'm also not sure your debian/README.source is particularly
relevant. First of all, one _should_ care about that copyright in
Debian since those files are shipped in the source package (so
clauses about distribution of those files certainly apply). If you
want to say that the binary package doesn't contain any code from
these files, perhaps a Comment in the relevant File paragraph in
debian/copyright would be better (as this file is actually installed
along with the binary package).
I've built your package, but I haven't installed and tested it, so I
cannot comment on that.