Hello, Thanks for your review. On Sat, Jul 03, 2010 at 10:50:07PM +0200, Giovanni Mascellani wrote:
Hi all. Il 03/07/2010 18:40, Giovanni Mascellani ha scritto:Il 03/07/2010 18:06, Iain Lane ha scritto:Done, but I couldn't build as it relies on hslogger-prof, which I can't get as uploads aren't being processed this weekend*. But you can build against it using your local copies and upload.Wonderful, I'll look at it this evening (UTC+0200). These will be my first two sponsored packages, so I may take some while to do all the checks. ;-)I had a look at yours packages and some comments. Anyway, about some of them I'm not completely sure, so I ask other more aged DD to confirm them or not. missingh: * source/format: you're setting it to 1.0; are there any specific reason for not use 3.0 (quilt)? If not, I'd say 3.0 it's more recommended.
No, I just thought that setting 1.0 would be the more minimal change. I don't understand what the point of 3.0 (quilt) is without any patches is, but please change it yourself before uploading if you want to.
* control: there are some missing substitution variable
(dpkg-gencontrol complains that some of them are not used); TTBOMK, you
should use:
- dev:
Depends:
${haskell:Depends},
${misc:Depends},
${shlibs:Depends}
Suggests: ${haskell:Suggests}
Recommends: ${haskell:Recommends}
Provides: ${haskell:Provides}
- prof:
Depends:
${haskell:Depends},
${misc:Depends}
Suggests: ${haskell:Suggests}
Recommends: ${haskell:Recommends}
Provides: ${haskell:Provides}
- doc:
Depends:
${haskell:Depends},
${misc:Depends}
Suggests: ${haskell:Suggests}
Recommends: ${haskell:Recommends}
Probably, the Haskell Policy should be updated (and not only for this
reason). Maybe I can find some time next week to have a look at it.
This feels somewhat like I'm being punished for problems that I didn't introduce.
* About the fact that libghc6-missingh-doc is substituting missingh-doc: reading policy 7.6.2, my understanding is that Conflicts is more appropriate than Breaks (because the old package must be completely removed). Why are you changing it?
I actually asked about this in #-devel and, since policy 3.9.0, it seems that Breaks: is preferred. So I think we're alright here.
* There are some lintian suggestions that you may want to follow (are you aware of the -I and --pedantic options? Sometimes they're really too pedantic, but usually they can give you good hints). All I: and P: are completely optional, but there are also two W: that you should fix (BSD is not anymore in common-licenses; I suspect this is due to the fact that there are many different BSD licenses, so saying "BSD" isn't clear: it's better to copy the verbatim text).
I didn't look at these, but rather did the specific changes I was trying to achieve, in addition to some low hanging cleanups.
haskell-configfile: * There's something strange in the repository: it appears that Marco has already packaged and tagged (but never updated) a version 1.0.6-2. You should clean things up. * source/format: as before
I added with 1.0. Fix if you want.
* control: as before, both for Depends & co. and for Breaks vs. Conflicts
As above.
* lintian: as before (but without W:s)
P: libghc6-configfile-dev: no-upstream-changelog P: libghc6-configfile-doc: no-upstream-changelog I: libghc6-configfile-doc: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration Don't know what you want me to do about this.
* package descriptions: I don't know what you mean with "DHG consistence", but don't like very much the initial paragraph you have put in all the descriptions (it could be the last, maybe; the first paragraphs should give a general idea of what the package do, not where to find information about the language it is written with). Is it really a best practice to have such a preamble? (this question, of course, is for the full mailing list).
I copied this from another package (mtl). I thought it was common across group packages. Maybe not.
* changelog: more generally, I wouldn't put acronyms like "DHG", that could be meaningless for our users.
Err, ok
* debian/configfile-doc.docs: can be removed.
Yes
Other than that, the packages seem to compile correctly (but I haven't done the cowbuilder test yet). Please, fix the issues I've outlined (or help me understanding why they're not problems :-) ), and I'll do the final check. Cheers, Giovanni (who feels a bit strange of standing for the first time on the other bank of the DD river!).
I must say, I think that some of the changes you are asking are somewhat pedantic. But I have to do them if I wish to see sponsorship so will look to fixing things tomorrow.
Iain
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature