Re: RFS: Sitplus -- Free software framework for ludic-therapeutic activities
2011/8/17 Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>:
> [Luis, I'll drop the CC in case you confirm that you are reading this list]
>
> Hi Luis,
>
> thanks for your work on sitplus.
Hi, Andreas. Thanks for reviewing my package. I've uploaded a new
version, 1.0.1-2, to [1].
> Here are my comments.
>
> 1. At first I would recommend to reflect group maintenance via
Done!
> as we are using the Debian Med packaging list as maintainer and it might
> probably make sense to allow DM uploads just in case you might intend to
> become a DM in the future.
Of course, I would like to become a DM. I've set DM uploads to yes.
> 2. You are specifying
>
> Vcs-Git: git://github.com/luinix/sitplus-debian.git
> Vcs-Browser: http://github.com/luinix/sitplus-debian
>
> to maintain the debian/ directory. I accepted your application for
> the Alioth Debian Med tam today so you will have access to the
> Debian Med SVN or Git repository at your preference.
>
> However, if you are using Git the Git-addictive here prefere to
> have a clone of the full upstream source inside ther repository
> using pristine tar. I can not competently comment on the reasons
> because specifically in the case of sitplus I do se a lot of byte
> ballast (17MB compressed data) for just maintaining the debian/ dir -
> however as a mere GIt beginner I do not feel responsible for the Git
> part of the policy.
>
> If you don't mind SVN, simply commiting the few files into the SVN
> might be another option for your workflow. Regardless what you
> decide (i will adapt to any decision) we should use the Vcs fields
> pointing to the Debian Med repository to enable other team members
> commiting flawlessly.
I've uploaded my code to git.debian.org/git/debian-med/sitplus.git and
updated the Vcs field as you told me. I've followed [2], I hope I
didn't made any mistake. I've set commit notifications to
debian-med-commit@lists.alioth.debian.org, is that right?
> 3. debian/copyright
>
> The package includes
>
> Files: graphics/pictures
> Copyright: 2011 Jordi Martorell Palliso & Lidia Porcar Tabernero
> License: CC-BY-NC-SA
>
> and CC-BY-NC-SA says:
>
> * Non-Commercial. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
>
> This clause is in conflict with DFGS[1] item
> 6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
> and thus makes the package non-free. Do you see any chance to contact
> the authors whether they might consider a more liberale license?
>
> BTW, the file graphics/pictures/License.txt mentions
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/legalcode
> ^^^
> while debian/copryright says
>
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/legalcode
> ^^^
Upstream has just released a new version that fixes this issue with
graphics/pictures license. Now it is CC-BY-SA. I've uploaded this new
version, 1.0.1.
> 4. Please explain debian/sitplus.dirs: etc/ld.so.conf.d
> I do not see any reason for creating this directory which remains
> empty in the final package and twiddling around with ls.so is at
> best hackish and should not be done if not needed.
I've tried several approach for having a private lib directory
(/usr/lib/sitplus). One of them was adding a new directory to ld path.
At the end I have used an RPATH, but I forgot to remove that directory
from the package.
> 5. IMHO the files debian/install and debian/sitplus.install are
> competing each other. I think sitplus.install wins, but I
> would remove debian/install to not confuse others.I would also
> prefix debian/post{inst,rm} files by 'sitplus.' because this
> makes things more verbose in multi binary packages. The same for
> debian/menu and debian/docs.
Fixed!
> So far for the important remarks, now a bit of nitpicking:
>
> 6. You provided a debian/sitplus.desktop file which is great (I wished
> more maintainers (including me in some cases) would do so. However,
> a missing manpage is claimed by lintian - it would be great if you
> could write a basic one to follow good packaging practice (feel free
> to ask if you need simple examples).
I've included a very basic manpage, I hope that is enough.
> 7. If you switch on lintian -I mode you see some more messages:
>
> I: sitplus source: quilt-patch-missing-description lib_location_fix.diff
> I: sitplus source: quilt-patch-missing-description packager.diff
> I: sitplus: spelling-error-in-binary usr/lib/sitplus/libspcore.so childs children
>
> I would at least inform upstream about the spelling error and adding
> some comments to your quilt patches would not harm (even if this is
> no precondition for sponsoring the package for sure).
I've added descriptions to the patches, and I've added a new patch to
fix the spelling error for the moment. I still have to notify
upstream.
> 8. debian/rules claims:
>
> # This file was originally written by Joey Hess and Craig Small.
>
> So either you mention these two people in debian/copyright if they
> have written some code of it (which they most probably did not) or
> just replace this dh-make template by something which makes more
> sense. I recommend something like
>
> # debian/rules file for sitplus (hey, this is no sample, right?)
> # Author: <you>
> # License. <as in debian/copyright)
>
> And yes, unfortunately about 50% of all Debian packages do contain
> this dh-make template ... :-(
Fixed!
> Kind regards and thanks for your work on this package
>
> Andreas.
Again, thanks for reviewing my package. Best regards!
[1] http://mentors.debian.net/package/sitplus
[2] http://documentation.debian-projects.org/other/debian-packaging-git/
--
"If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a
horrible warning" -- Catherine Aird
Reply to: