Re: RFS: lowpan-tools
On 9/8/10, Luca Bruno <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov scrisse:
>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lowpan-tools".
> Sorry for taking so much time.
> I found some minor issues, which shouldn't be so hard to work our as
> you are also upstream author.
> First of all, I'm also interested in this package, but I can't maintain
> it on my own, as I don't have enough hardware to test it. So, would you
> mind co-maintaing it? I'd be useful to put it under alioth collab-maint
> in a VCS of your choice (eg. git). Is it fine?
Collab-maint is fine for me.
I ain´t sure about best current practices in Debian if the upstream
source provides debian/ directory in the first place. Currently lowpan-tools
has gits on sf.net (git://linux-zigbee.git.sourceforge.net/gitroot/linux-zigbee/
linux-zigbee) and kernel.org (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/networking/
lowpan/lowpan-tools.git). If you can use either of them (and it´s not agains
Debian recomendations for collaborative maintenance), I think it would
be the best way to go. If you´d prefer to have a repo on alioth, you
can create it the way you´d prefer.
> Then, some comments:
Thank you for the comments.
I´m currently on vacation, I´ll look on them after 20th, as I return back to my
> * your debian/rules contains some old and commented lines, it could
> benefits some cleaning and refactoring (the way you call binary-common
> seems a bit strange to me, at a first glance). You may also consider
> using helpers from dh7.
IIRC that was (mostly) generated by some version of dh_make. I´ll look into
cleaning it up.
> * your debian/copyright is a bit incomplete; the repo on github seems
> to be vanished, and some files are not GPLv2 (eg. include/ieee802154.h
> is LGPLv2.1+ and IMHO coord-config-parse.c may benefit of some
BTW: what clarifications would you like for the parser code? Is
phrasing like this
.... parser files are generated by bison and contain some bison code (licesed
under GPL3+), however by special upstream exception those files are distributed
under GPL2, as those files are a part of a greater wok.
Also I´d need to add some clarifications for the flex-generated file
> * your debian/changelog should mention that this version is the first
> officially uploaded, and in theory should refer to an ITP (which I
> haven't found, I think you didn't open it).
Let´s mark ¨first uploaded¨ version right before one will really upload it
to d.o. Do I need to file ITP? If so, I´ll do it after 20th.
With best wishes