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

Re: BALLView: new package version

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Andreas Moll wrote:

Well, the only packages that provide fancyheadings are
tetex-extra and tetex-src.
If these two packages do not exist, there are further problems with building the tutorial's PDF.

What happens if you do a 's/fancyheadings/fancyhdr/'.  According to
the TeX experts this would be a reasonable patch even for upstream.

 * You should make clear in debian/copyright which parts of the upstream
   tarball you removed (as I understand it, you repackaged it).
I just removed the build support for MacOS and Windows which wont be needed. Do I really need to mention this?

It does not harm to mention what was removed.

 * Can you convince upstream that CF_VERSION_CHECK is maybe not needed?
   You work around it by touching config.lic, which doesn't look very
   nice either (if that code wasn't written by upstream, anyway).  As
   BALL is LGPL, I see no reason to bother the user with a "Yes, I
   agree" kind of stuff similar to Windows EULAs.
I will try, but my boss wrote it himself. Therefore, I guess he wont let it
be removed.

Sorry for the German quote in an ENglish mailing list, but my fortune
cooky of yesterday was:

  Zivilcourage nennt man das, was von einem Mann übriggeblieben ist,
  wenn sein Chef das Zimmer betreten hat!
                -- Wernher Freiherr von Braun (Physiker)


 * The way you not just rename upstream's debian/ to debian-upstream/,
   but extensively use it in debian/rules looks very dubious to me; e.g.
   debian-upstream/createBALLVIEWDEB looks very un-debianish to me. I
   really suggest you just ignore debian-upstream; I very much doubt it
   would pass the ftp-master checks for entering the Debian archive
   as well.
This directory is part of the upstream package. (I am upstream and downstream author.) It contains all files that are needed for building the modified tarball as well as the source and binary debian/ubuntu packages.

So the Debian maintainer in you should ask the upstream maintainer in you:
What are you doing if there is a packaging issue that has to be fixed in
the debian directory and needs a new Debian version? Will you release a
new upstream version with unchanged program code?

Kind regards



Reply to: