Re: RFS: lynis (updated package)
Hi again,
On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 10:59:02AM +0000, Francisco M. García Claramonte wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 1.1.7-1
> of my package "lynis".
a general comment: As our freeze is coming up soon I just want to ask
you if you are sure that introducing a new upstream version is good.
Please check carefully if something could break with this new upstream
version as there will not be much time to fix things.
Now to the review itself:
Mostly good, some not-to-bad issues and some nitpicks.
- debian/README.Debian: Thats really a nitpick, but you updated it, so its a
good thing to update the timestamp at the end of the file, too, IMHO
- debian/changelog:
- "Changed menu title. Now is more descriptive" seems to me as it is
no good changelog entry. What is this menu title you are referring
to? And there is an 'it' missing to make the last sentence
actually make sense :-)
- Just personal preference, but I would have written "Added a
reference to lynis documentation website in README.Debian",
because I think your changelog entry is not so good to understand
for a not so technical experienced person and additional the word
'link' is a bit awkward, because you can't link urls in textfiles.
- debian/copyright:
- Important: (C) has no legal meaning, therefore it has to be
replaced with ©.
- The "License" part of the copyright file misses a license excerpt,
which should usually be added.
- The "License" part of the copyright misses a reference to
the license in /u/s/common-licenses. It should have an own
reference to this file, just like your packaging has.
- README: Contains installation information. Not really bad, but some
people prefer to remove them from the files they install (e.g. by
patching the README file or using some magic). You can decide if you
want to do so. I don't think it is a blocker.
As reviewing is an iterative process it might be that I might write you
additional points once you come back to, but for now this is all.
Best Regards,
Patrick
Reply to: