[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Help/sponsorship needed in upstreaming multiple elpa/melpa packages to debian



Hello,

On Tue 02 Jun 2020 at 12:19PM +02, Sławomir Wójcik wrote:

>> - copyright years do not match those claimed by upstream
>> - does not close ITP
>> - Upstream-Name field is blank?
>> - old std-ver
>
> fixed

Uploaded.

Seems that upstream also claims copyright for 2013, as stated in the .el
file itself.  Also, it is best to avoid having tags upstream/1.2 and
also v1.2; this makes it harder to use tools like git-deborig(1) when
uploading.

>  >
>  >> groovy-emacs-modes:
>  >> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=961048
>  >> https://salsa.debian.org/Valdaer/groovy-emacs-modes
>  >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/groovy-emacs-modes
>  >
>  > - needs binary packages for each .el file so that we have one binary
>  >    package corresponding to each package on MELPA
>
> Good catch I don't know why I missed this, double checked that and only
> grails-mode is a separate package on melpa, all other files are packaged
> in groovy-mode

A few more issues with this one I'm afraid.

- the long description for elpa-grails-mode isn't really appropriate --
  how to use a package isn't meant to go there.  Please see Debian
  Policy and the Developer's Reference on package descriptions

- there are a number of copyright notices missing from d/copyright

- the tests seem to require undercover but you don't have a build-dep
  declared -- are those tests getting run?

- it seems that the version number 2.0 applies only to groovy-mode.el
  not grails-mode.el which is using a different scheme?  Do you know how
  packages which depend on grails-mode declare the version they require?
  If they use the grails-mode.el scheme then unfortunately we might need
  to split into two source packages.

>  > - copyright years do not match those claimed by upstream
>
> haven't found the year in license file, what is the process/policy in
> that case? do we look in file headers/comments first? I have done so
> now, before I've taken the year from repository first commit.

It's okay to infer copyright from repository information like that, but
in addition, any copyright *claims* in the upstream source usually has
to be copied into d/copyright.  Take a look at the relevant sections of
Policy.

-- 
Sean Whitton


Reply to: