Re: RFS: sunflow
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Damien Raude-Morvan wrote:
> missing "(C) 2006 by Mad Crew" from
> - I'm not sure about your move "Section: from graphics to java", but YMMV.
> - I'm not really found of "Removed VCS fields" item :) AFAIK, sunflow is
> in in collab-maint  and I tend to prefer package to be maintained in
> some sort of $VCS
> (Gabriele, we already had this discussion :).
I took a look at my mail archive and no, we didn't have it :) You talked
to someone else.
I got your point but I tend to prefer the opposite.
Anyway, pushed 
> Can you explain what was your build failure with this method ?
> (and, by the way, add this explenation to patch header)
> #addMouseWheelListener() exist in Java API since 1.4
Build failure disappeared :| so now mouse wheel works too.
> - You are using debian/docs and dh_install release/javadoc/*
> usr/share/doc/sunflow/html : you should make a choice
> - You should register your docs with doc-base
> - ... but I don't think there added value by providing Javadoc for Java
Until now, I tried to modify as less as possible Cyril's work because
svn snapshot shouldn't be too much different from the latest Debian
version 0.07.2 and even because Cyril is a DD and we all trust in his
work, don't we? :)
"no added value with javadoc for java apps": THIS is a discussion we had
for jxplorer and I removed javadoc.
IMHO, this case is different because sunflow is a dependency of
sweethome3d which uses sunflow's API in svn snapshot version (that's why
I'm packaging it). Would adding -doc binary be better?
What about following this draft about javadoc?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----