[MoM] Re: ITP: r-cran-igraph -- GNU R package for igraph
Dear Alba,
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:20:04PM +0100, Alba Crespi wrote:
> > I have seen one repository created by the user albac-guest with the name
> > pkg.git. It seems you literally followed:
> >
> > ssh git.debian.org
> > cd /git/debian-med
> > ./setup-repository pkg 'Packaging of pkg in Debian'
> >
> > while this "pkg" was just a placeholder for your package. I now tried to
> > enhance the syntax to
> >
> > ./setup-repository <pkg> 'Packaging of <pkg> in Debian'
>
> That sound much clear to me! Thanks :)
:-)
Since we are now diving into the details of the Debian Med team and I would
really encourage you to keep on asking even if the questions you might come
up might sound simple I suggest we follow the formalism I established in
the Debian Med team which is called "Mentoring of the Month":
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianMed/MoM
These mail exchanges are exactly what MoM is about and so I took the
freedom without asking you to add an according row to the MoM students
table and tagged the subject [MoM]. This has the advantage that other
potential newcomers will be able to easily spot this type of
conversation while people who are just keen on discussing medical
software might skip this.
You might have noticed that I have put you into the June slot. The
reason is that one one hand May is just occupied but I'll be basically
offline in June and I would really get you up and running quite quickly.
Since you are quite advanced and I assume not much mentoring will be
needed any more (same with the other student Afif I hope to be able to
work with you both at the same time and the usual mentoring quality (in
terms of speedy response and detailed explanations). I hope you like
this.
> > We are really happy about hints like this. However, the problem is from
> > a perspective of a senior developer it is sometimes hard to feel like a
> > newcomer and what needs to be mentioned in what detail. Any hint you
> > might like to give how to enhance the documentation after you understood
> > things due to some explanation here on the list would be welcome.
>
> As you said, once I understand better, I will
This would be really welcome. BTW, the policy document remains in SVN[1]
which might a show stopper for some Git users. We might consider moving
the document (and the other files in the community dir to Git) if others
agree. In any case you also have commit permissions to SVN.
> > (and here replace <pkg> by r-cran-fastmatch) via
> >
> > git push --all --set-upstream
> > git push --tags
>
> Done it!
Great. I just pulled it.
> Yes, I am subscribed to the list.
OK, so I only write to the list.
Here are my comments to the r-cran-fastmatch packaging.
Our policy says that we are using a workflow that includes a
pristine-tar branch. You can create this as written in policy by
using
git import-orig --pristine-tar /path/to/package_version.orig.tar.gz
You can do this also now in the current state of the repository. The
rationale behind this branch is that it contains the necessary metadata
to recreate a md5 sum identical tarball. This makes sure we are working
both on the very same tarball without the need to download anything in
addition. So could you please import and push this?
Regarding debian/changelog you have created three different paragraphs
which might describe your changes. This is not necessary for not yet
uploaded files. I guess you have uploaded these revisions to
mentors.d.n but this is irrelevant for the final upload since neither
1.0-4-1 nor (1.0-4-2 were really uploaded to unstable the changelog
might be confusing. Moreover the ITP bug is closed in an outdated
changelog paragraph - so it will not effectively closed by the upload.
Finally ftpmaster who needs to accept the package does not like long
"uninteresting" stories. In short: Please strip down the changelog
to only
r-cran-fastmatch (1.0-4-1) unstable; urgency=medium
* Initial release. (Closes: #784264)
-- Alba Crespi <crespialba+debian@gmail.com> Mon, 04 May 2015 18:56:30 +0100
... perhaps by updating the timestamp.
Regarding debian/control: You mention
Testsuite: autopkgtest
This is probably a cut-n-pasto since no testsuite is actually provided.
While we try to approach test suites for each package the upstream code
does not seem to provide anything that might be useful for this. In any
case you can even drop this field since it is automatically added by
dpkg-buildpackage if a test suite is found.
The file debian/gbp.conf could be dropped IMHO. It doese not specify
anything non standard and unneeded files might add noise. BTW, it
specifies pristine-tar = True which is wrong at the moment.
Everything else looks fine to me.
> Thank you very much!
You are welcome. :-)
Welcome in the Debian Med team
Andreas.
[1] https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debian-med/trunk/community/website/docs/policy.xml?view=markup
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: