Dear Mentors, [CC to the original maintainer] I sincerely hope that particular spell on me is lifted (recently I've written four mails to DDs and haven't recieved any response yet)... My short-term goal is to simply maintain the orphaned[1] package irssi-scripts[2] whereas in the long run I'd also like to contribute to various parts of Debian and possibly become a DD myself. I've taken measures to conclude the first step, ie. I carefully stepped on some upstream developers' toes as well as bugged the upstream maintainer and put together an update for this package which, I believe, closes all outstanding bugs[3] as well as it is lintian / linda clean and (de)installs just fine. My further plans include adding several other scripts to this package as well as continuing maintenance. Here are the mixed package's specs: * Package name : irssi-scripts Version : 11 Upstream Maintainer : Stefan 'tommie' Tomanek <stefan@pico.ruhr.de> * URL : http://scripts.irssi.org/ * License : GPLv2 / BSD / Public Domain Description : useful collection of scripts for irssi Long Description : This is a collection of useful sets for the irssi IRC-client. Thus, installing this package makes only sense if you intend to use irssi. . Please see the contained README.Debian for additional packages you might need for some individual scripts to work properly. There's a quick-and-dirty deb repository for this at deb http://ernst.uni-hd.de/debian ./ deb-src http://ernst.uni-hd.de/debian ./ However, while packaging I encountered some problems where I need some input: 1) Dependencies: This package contains 222 individual scripts. 16 of them need libwww-perl to run so I made this a Recommends:, but there are several other dependencies only one or at most two scripts need at all so I set them to Suggests: resulting in 24 packages (~25MB) listed there. Actually I thought about explaining these dependencies in the long description, but later on considered it to be bloat and moved it to README.Debian leaving the user basically alone during install stage. Should I rather explain the dependencies for each single one of these 23 demanding scripts in the description, or keep it like that, or...? 2) Dependencies: All Recommends: and Suggests: are not versioned, and unfortunately I don't know whether they really need to be or not... (I don't mean policy-wise, but regarding this particular package.) 3) Dependencies: One script (openurl.pl) has hardcoded w3m, ncftp and mutt. I duly replaced w3m by sensible-browser, but I'm not sure what to do with the rest... So far I've left it alone. 4) Perl Policy: One script (xmmsinfo.pl) actually contains a module that needs to be split out. I guess I need to install this module to a directory in the perl module path[4], but how should I preferrably do it? Thanks for taking the time, cheers, Flo [1]http://bugs.debian.org/229921 [2]http://packages.debian.org/unstable/net/irssi-scripts [3]http://bugs.debian.org/irssi-scripts [4]http://www.de.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/perl-policy/ch-perl.html#s-paths
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature