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

Re: smooth-tasks



Hi,

Alle lunedì 11 giugno 2012, Salvo Tomaselli ha scritto:
> given that smooth-tasks gets removed and apparently it can't compile
> on kde 4.8

This package is one of the two currently not compatible with KDE 
workspace 4.8 libraries, so thanks for working on it.

> i've found a fork online and packaged it.

It could seem ok, although having some kind of release upstream would be 
even better...

> i did not change the original maintainer field, but i know him
> personally and he hasn't been replying. he's on cc.

If he agrees, you could always have yourself as added Uploader (which 
equals to a co-maintainer).

> I've changed the homepage in the control file.

This change shall be described in changelog.
In general, any change you do shall be there, like:
- the change of upstream, and the fact that you are doing a snapshot
  from a VCS (and possibly from which branch)
- Standards-Version bumps
- build dependencies bumps
- changes in the patches
etc.
copyright needs to be updated with the new contributor(s) too.
(Also as niptic: the patches directory can be removed altogether if it's 
empty.)

> I think the changelog has to be edited because i am not sure of which
> version number should be assigned to the package.

The version you chose is not correct, since it's lower than the current 
version:
$ dpkg --compare-versions '0.0~flupp0' gt '0.0~wip20100227' && echo yes
(prints nothing)
This would cause the fact that the new version would not replace the old 
one automatically, and more important that it will not enter the Debian 
archive (since new releases must be always greater than the last one in 
the specified suite).

The fact that there isn't a stable release does not help with this; one 
solution could be to append a marker of the flupp VCS snapshot, like:
  0.0~wip20100227+flupp0~hgYYYYMMDD

> In case of upload, neither me or Salvo Rinaldi are DD so after the
> very likely modifications required a sponsor would be required.

That is not an issue.

-- 
Pino Toscano

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: