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

Re: [MoM] Debian Med MoM for February



Hi Sukhbir,

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 01:34:53AM -0500, Sukhbir Singh wrote:
> I updated the package and made some changes.
> 
>     $ lintian hunspell-en-med_1-1_amd64.changes
>     W: hunspell-en-med: wrong-bug-number-in-closes l3:#nnnn
>     W: hunspell-en-med: new-package-should-close-itp-bug

That's better now.  You seem to have choosen an outdated example for
debian/copyright specification.  I fixed this because it was the
quickest way to deal with it.  Please try to fix the example where
you have drawn the outdated specification in turn.

I had also a look into the debian/watch file.  If you try

$ uscan --verbose --report
-- Scanning for watchfiles in .
-- Found watchfile in ./debian
-- In debian/watch, processing watchfile line:
   http://www.e-medtools.com/OMS_Hunspell.zip
uscan warning: Filename pattern missing version delimiters ()
  in debian/watch, skipping:
  http://www.e-medtools.com/OMS_Hunspell.zip
-- Scan finished

you see that something is wrong somehow.  It seems that upstream does no
proper versioning to their releases.  On one hand this makes our
versioning questionable on the other hand we will not be able to detect
new versions.

Now starts the non-technical part of the Debian packaging:  Please try
to contact upstream, tell them kindly about your intend to build a
Debian package from their work and teach them about the reason to apply
some proper versioning of the download file.  For instance they could
name the download file

    OMS_Hunspell-1.0.zip

or something like this.

In parallel it seems now the right time to issue the ITP (as you just
asked previously).  You can tell reportbug to CC this mailing list and
it makes also sense to mention the Git repository where you did the
initial work.

Kind regards

        Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de


Reply to: