Re: RFC / RFS: furl_2.1-1
On (11/08/06 12:26), Marco Bertorello wrote:
> Hi Mentors,
>
> I'm looking for comment (and possibly a sponsor) about my package
> "furl":
First, the packaging looks very good overall.
A few small points:
* debian/changelog: you should close an ITP bug with the upload. See
http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ for instructions on reporting the
ITP. The add (Closes: #xxxxx) to the line in the changelog, where
xxxxx is the bug number you get assigned.
(To everyone else on the list, is X-Debbugs-CC:
debian-devel@lists.debian.org added automatically? I haven't filed
on myself, but it seems like they all go to the list, and I'm sure
that not everyone manually adds this.)
* The description could be longer, but I'm not sure there's too much
more youcould say. Perhaps add that it can impersonate IE or
Mozilla, and that the request can be specified.
* You should add an actual license header to debian/copyright. See
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/03/msg00023.html
* debian/rules: You don't need dh_installexamples, also some people
don't like commented dh_ calls.
* debian/furl.1 says furl [OPTIONS] [URL] [filename], but doesn't say
what filename is for, and furl http://www.google.com/ temp shows the
usage text (though the usage text also shows this syntax)
>
> Thanks a lot for your attention and sorry for my english ;-)
>
I see nothing wrong with your English. Thanks for packaging this, I will
certainly be using it. Unfortunately I can't upload it myself.
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
Reply to: