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

Re: RFS: libparams-util-perl -- Perl extension for simple standalone param-checking functions

Jonas Genannt <jonas.genannt@capi2name.de> writes:

> I am searching for an sponsor for the libparams-util-perl package.

Just a few things:

 * This package creates a stray /usr/lib/perl5 directory.  (I think I
   forgot to check this with your other package as well, actually.)
   After make install, add:

       rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty --parents $(TMP)/usr/lib/perl5

   to get rid of it.  Most Perl module packages want either this or the
   equivalent command for /usr/share/perl5.

 * This bit from the description:

       To use, simply load the module providing the functions you want to
       use as arguments (as shown in the SYNOPSIS). For now, to aid in
       clarity and code maintenance, you will need to name the functions
       explicitly, rather than just importing everything.

   is usage information rather than a description of the package.  I'd
   leave it off.  People using Perl modules should expect to run perldoc
   on the module to figure out how to use it.

 * In the first paragraph of the description, I'd drop the "a hell of a
   lot" and just say that it makes checking parameters easier.  Also, in
   the last sentence, I think that should be "it should" rather than "in

 * The copyright statement in debian/copyright isn't a copy of the
   statement in the module itself.  What it says is substantively the
   same, but I'm paranoid about that sort of thing and would rather see a
   cut and paste of the COPYRIGHT section of the perldoc for the module
   into debian/copyright (preceded by the package information and source
   location and followed by the standard text about where to find the GPL
   and Artistic license, of course).

Everything else looks good.  Drop me a line when the above has been fixed
and I'll be happy to sponsor the upload.

Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org)               <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply to: