Re: Newbie questions on packaging opencpn
Hi Andreas & Bas
On 27/09/18 12:07, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Alec and Bas,
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2018 at 09:51:10PM +0200, Alec Leamas wrote:
>>>>> N: A simple typo in a comment, not worth issuing a PR.
>>>>> O: libunarr1: spelling-error-in-binary
>>>>> usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libunarr.so.1.0.0 amout amount
>>>>> You can collect a few more spelling errors before upstreaming if you want.
>>>>
>>>> A downstream patch handling a typo in a comment? Frankly: no>>>> Seriously: please don't push this issue.
>>>
>>> But I will, because the fix is trivial.
>>>
>>
>> Is this your last remark? Or is there anything else?
>
> I did not followed this longish thread but only the last two
> contributions and like to comment on this. There are diverging opinions
> about spelling issues in upstream software. I personally tend to fix
> these since it is part of the user experience to avoid spelling mistakes
> and friendly upstreams are happy even about this kind of hints.
> Upstream realises that in Debian are maintainers who care - so they will
> trust us to do a good job in general.
>
> On the other hand I admit I do not fix all spelling errors - may be put
> this issue on pending for any next upload
This is not much work, agreed. The thing disturbing me was that I'm
used to that reviewers tries to state all remarks once the package is in
a reviewable state (which no doubt required some cycles in this case).
When this kind of remark was added in a very late state I was surprised
and I thus raised the question "is there more"?
Anyway, this is now history, unarr is accepted in Debian. Hopefully,
this was some initial friction between new people. If possible, I would
prefer to put this behind and move on.
Cheers!
--alec
Reply to: