Re: RFS: sshfp - DNS SSHFP records generator
Hola Julien Valroff!
El 23/06/2008 a las 21:01 escribiste:
> > I've made several changes to your package, listed bellow:
> > - I used the pristine tar.gz, as I don't see any reason not to.
> The pristine tarball already has a debian/ directory. Keeping it makes
> the diff.gz harder to read, but I don't know if there is any consensus
> on this point.
> I remember having read Daniel Baumann's recommendations [0] when taking
> the decision to remove the existing debian/ directory.
There is no consensus. But if you modify the pristine source it's always a good
idea to document the process in the debian/rules get-orig-source.
> > - I had removed the previous contents of debian/changelog, as the pre-debian
> > packaging history is of little/no use.
> In that case, I totally agree. But it might be a good idea to keep
> previous entries in case they are useful to understand current
> packaging.
This particular changelog had nothing interesting. In fact most of the changes
were the ones found in the CHANGES files.
> > - I changed packaging from cdbs to dh, as cdbs is too dificult to follow. I
> > used dh instead of plain debhelper to keep the debian/rules files small and
> > simple. Even though this increased debian/compat to 7. (not really needed,
> > but I really don't like cdbs)
> > - I added dpatch support and dependency. (as a replacement of simplepatchsys)
> It is a matter of taste, I have nothing against using debhelper. I have
> never used dh, but it looks quite nice (I still need to study this
> deeper when I have more time)
cdbs is too difficult to follow. Its fine to do some packaging for oneself, but
it's quite troublesome when you are trying fix some weird behaviour in someone
elses package. Anyway, if you prefer cdbs, please change it, but I won't review
it. :)
> > - I created a patch that fixes some quirks in the Makefile (should be forward
> > to upstream).
> > - I created a patch that fixes some quirks in the manpage (should be forward to
> > upstream).
> great, have you already forwarded these patches?
No, being your RFS I believe you should contact upstream and send the patches.
> > - I changed the debian/copyright file to include the same text as is presented in
> > the source code.
> Maybe this file could be switched to the machine parsable format, what
> do you think?
That would be great.
> > - I added the Homepage: field.
> Wasn't it already added? I have a version with this field, as well as
> the Vcs-* fields - I might have forgotten to upload this new version to
> mentors.
> I think it would be useful to add these Vcs-* fields once they have
> reached a definitive location.
Ok, do the proposed changes and I'll review it again.
> Adding "XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: yes" would also be a good thing for me if
> you don't object to this idea.
> Would you be interested in co-maintaining this package? Not a lot of
> work anyway, but I could then benefit from your experience.
I prefer to review the package before its uploaded, until they don't need my
intervention. And then we can add the "XS-DM-Upload-Allowed: yes".
--
A computer scientist is someone who, when told to "Go to Hell,"
sees the "go to," rather than the destination, as harmful.
Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/
Reply to: