Hi Kiwamu, On 12-02-28 at 11:50am, Kiwamu Okabe wrote: > On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr@jones.dk> wrote: > >> Can I move it to > >> http://darcs.debian.org/pkg-haskell/haskell-pandoc? > > > > I prefer to work in collab-maint. Reason for that is that I want to > > make the bar as low as possible for Debian members to contribute to > > the packaging. If moved to pkg-haskell, a Debian developer would > > need to be member of that team to have write access. > > OK. > I git-pushed my changes to pandoc repo on collab-maint. > Could you check it? > (But you may wait > haskell-zip-archive/haskell-texmath/haskell-citeproc-hs packages, > because new pandoc needs them.) Your changes look good (from a first quick glance at it). Seems you forgot to push the tag created when you added the new upstream tarball. Please do "git push --tags". Please always check if a package you want to work on contains a README.source. This one contains one, and one of the things is that I request that you bump the md5sum when updating upstream source. Great that you improved the watchfile. Remember to mention in changelog (at least) all user-visible changes. I find your improvement to the watchfile relevant to mention. Feel free to discuss my packaging methods, or to help improve the wording of that README.source (ideally it should be reference to a wiki page instead, to better reuse across the many package using it). > > I don't call that to "sponsor", however: > > > > To me, "sponsoring" is when you work alone and need someone to > > "bless" your work. I find that different from "teamwork" where we > > work together and one of us that is a Debian member releases our > > collaborative work. > > > > Sorry for the nitpicking - it is important for me to distinguish, > > because I don't like sponsoring but is happy doing teamwork. > > I think I understand it. > I will use "Please help me to ***dput foo package*** because I am DM" > next time. Hmm. I would prefer "Please have a look at $package, I think it is ready for release now which I can't do as DM." That invites to not only "approve" your changes which is the working style that I dislike, but at the same time invites for more in-depth collaboration. > >> > Just please stay with CDBS as packaging style (i.e. don't switch > >> > to short-form dh). > >> > >> OK. > >> I will touch debian/rules file without nessasary. > > > > No no, please feel "at home" - work on the packaging in general, > > including editing the rules file. I only ask that you do not > > fundamentally restructure the packaging away from CDBS. Reason for > > that is that I personally work most efficiently with CDBS - I am > > involved in more than 100 packages all done using similar packaging > > style. > > Sorry. It's my English mistake. > I kept CDBS style debian/rules. No no, don't be sorry. And certainly not for your language skills: I am non-english too, just happen to live in a country so small that english influence through media is massive (in Denmark most movies are british or american and they are subtitled, not dubbed). And please read what I wrote: I _encourage_ you to work in the rules file too! Don't be humble - even if you make mistakes you need not be sorry, we can just fix it again (and learn from it) :-) - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature