Re: RFS: Tunapie

[James Westby <jw+debian@jameswestby.net>]

On (25/09/06 23:34), James Stone wrote:
> 
> > m.d.n still has version -4. So you wish to upload an updated version?
> > 
> > James
> 
> Don't know what happened, I had a .upload file but it was not on the
> server. I have re-uploaded it now.
> 

Thanks, 

I cannot sponsor, but I have a few comments,

  * It would be good to add proper license headers in the source files
    of the package, for instance stating what versions of the GPL are
    allowed. I think it is better to be explicit, and follow the GNU's
    guidelines for doing this.
  * Can you drop the multiple blank lines at the end of debian/control.
  * Your standards version is out of date, please update it and make any
    necessary changes.
  * Please
    - make tunapie.sf.net a full URI.
    - make License: say Copyright and License, or pull out the Copyright
      in to its own section.
    - add a copyright/license statement about your packaging.
  * Does your adult/safe debconf stuff work correctly with the new
    python policy? Does your package even conform?
  * You call update-menu in post*, what package is this program from?
  * Please use po-debconf.
  * Consider a tidy up of debian/rules, removing comments and commented
    out dh_* calls.
  * Consider adding a watch file.
  * Is debconf really the best way of doing the adult/safe
    configuration?

I still get plenty of lintian warnings

  W: tunapie source: uses-dh-python-with-no-pycompat
  E: tunapie source: missing-dh_python-build-dependency python |
    python-dev | python-all-dev
  I: tunapie: possible-non-posix-code-in-maintainer-script postrm:3 '[
  "$1" = "purge" -a '
  W: tunapie: no-debconf-config
  W: tunapie: postinst-uses-db-input

Please fix these and I will review the package again.

James

-- 
  James Westby   --    GPG Key ID: B577FE13    --     http://jameswestby.net/
  seccure key - (3+)k7|M*edCX/.A:n*N!>|&7U.L#9E)Tu)T0>AM - secp256r1/nistp256