9/29/13 9:55 PM, David Bate пишет: > On Sunday 29 September 2013 18:56:50 Anton Balashov wrote: >> So, the package becomes more clean and I hope to release it. Open >> questions: >> >> * Should I make a patch for manpage? > Yes, but as Boris mentioned, see if it is already fixed upstream. A > note - you may want to have your upstream branch as a copy of upstream > git. This makes things easier when picking patches. > > Also, this way git-buildpackage can auto generate your tarballs from > upstream tags, see the git-upstream-tag option - this would also > simplify the process of creating your tarbals even in the case you > want to use an arbitrary upstream commit as, AFAIK, you could place > the relevant tag onto the upstream branch (i.e. your copy of upstreams > tree). > >> * What to do with dir "syntax"? > I think that these files should be packaged. Currently I see that > your source only builds one package. I would suggest you split the > syntax files into another package as a user of the compiler would not > necessarily want the syntax files (also, they are arch independent). > > These files may be suitable to go into a -dev package, but I may be > wrong. Also, there is a .tex file doc/specification.tex that > describes the QuakeC language used by gmqcc. It would be great (but > not necessary) if this were compiled and put into a package too. It > could go into the same package as the syntax files. > >> * Who will be able to became a sponsor for the package? It need for >> Xonotic (one of the best open FTS for Linix). Link for review [3]. > > Don't worry about this part yet. > > David > > > Yes, but as Boris mentioned, see if it is already fixed upstream. A > note - you may want to have your upstream branch as a copy of upstream > git. This makes things easier when picking patches. Done: * I remade the upstream branch. Now it's upstream/master. [1] * Made a pull request to upstream about hyphen-used-as-minus-sign [2] (already merged). > I would suggest you split the > syntax files into another package as a user of the compiler would not > necessarily want the syntax files (also, they are arch independent). I'm not sure that will be good. Yes, separate arch independent files is a good process, but what package it will be? Just one this dir? Where I should install it to? As end user, I would expect autointegration with my IDE's what I don't plan to do. You got my idea :) WDYT? > Also, there is a .tex file doc/specification.tex that > describes the QuakeC language used by gmqcc. It would be great (but > not necessary) if this were compiled and put into a package too. It > could go into the same package as the syntax files. Because it's a doc file I deep it should be in the main package. Because if user wouldn't install the syntax package, hi will not get a docs? :) I'll google what to do with this tex file and will add it to the package. [1] http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=pkg-games/gmqcc.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/upstream [2]https://github.com/graphitemaster/gmqcc/pull/134
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature