On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 06:12:01PM -0000, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote: > New Revision: 33723 [snip] > back to UNRELEASED, TODO added to changelog Thanks for your reviews, comments, and changes - both here and in the other modules I've injected lately! As you can see, I've taken heed of your remarks for libtest-signature-perl - and thanks for uploading it! :) Thanks for helping me along the way as I'm learning the ropes of packaging Perl modules for Debian :) Now, I've just got a question here... > Modified: trunk/libtest-portability-files-perl/debian/changelog > URL: http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/pkg-perl/trunk/libtest-portability-files-perl/debian/changelog?rev=33723&op=diff > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/libtest-portability-files-perl/debian/changelog (original) > +++ trunk/libtest-portability-files-perl/debian/changelog Wed Apr 22 18:11:56 2009 > @@ -1,4 +1,10 @@ > -libtest-portability-files-perl (0.05-1) unstable; urgency=low > +libtest-portability-files-perl (0.05-1) UNRELEASED; urgency=low > + > + TODO: > + - missing build dependencies: libtest-pod-perl, libtest-pod-coverage-perl Fixed. Oops. Need to look into conditionally-executed tests, too. I *do* test all my modules with pdebuild, but this did not make the test fail, just be skipped (as I'm sure you already know :)) > + - long description ends with a colon, probably: s/ Here are the default options:// Fixed. Oops. Must learn to read. > + - please remove debian/docs; README is not useful for users Fixed. Yep. Useless indeed. > + - please use our "default" debian/rules file Now this is the part I'm wondering about :) Could we get some consensus here? 'Cause just today, I've seen Damyan minimize the debian/rules files for at least two modules - rev. 33847 in libapache2-authcassimple-perl and rev. 33861 in libwww-mechanize-formfiller-perl. In both cases, he used the "%: dh $@" notation, and with WWW::Mechanize::FormFiller he also used the new debhelper 7.2 (well, technically 7.0.50) override rules. IMHO both the minimal notation and the override rules greatly help the rules file readability - we're left with just what is *really* needed there. I'm just fine with using the "default" debian/rules file, with the important targets spelled out and the *-stamp files touched; but still, in my other Debian packages I've switched to the minimized rules file with override targets as necessary, and IMHO it could be helpful to the pkg-perl files, too. It is true that this makes it just a little bit harder to maintain a separate Lenny backport branch, but actually, there's a newish debhelper version on bp.o, too, so even this is not that much of an issue. Well, okay, so in my other Debian packages I *am* maintaining separate backport branches for both Lenny and Etch, and I am using the default debhelper versions in those dists, meaning the rules files do differ, but even that is not all that hard, and I'd be okay with doing this for the pkg-perl modules too if needed. Argh, this message turned out to be a lot longer than I intended it to be :( Once again, thanks for your time and assistance! G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org roam@FreeBSD.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 "yields falsehood, when appended to its quotation." yields falsehood, when appended to its quotation.
Description: PGP signature