Hi please keep the discussion on the list. Dne Mon, 04 Oct 2010 16:45:32 -0400 zeus@gnu.org napsal(a): > Michal Čihař <nijel@debian.org> writes: > > Hi! > > > It would be great if you've mentioned some other details in the RFS > > email - It is new package? Are you adopting it? What is your > > motivation to take care of this package? Does the upload fix any bugs? > > No this package isn't new, in fact exist a previous version 1.8.8 which > the current maintainer ask for someone to maintain, I'm responding to > that bug 544057[1]. > > I want this package to be updated in Debian because I just finish the > ssl plugin for the monkey http daemon project and it will use this > version of matrixssl since the current (1.8.8) doesn't work so well. Great, it would be nice to know this in first email. > > > Quick look at the package: > > > > 1. It is orphaned package, you seem to want to addopt it, so why your > > latest changelog entry mentions NMU? > > This it's the funny part, I had some troubles trying to understand > what's the NMU didn't find a place to understand and then fix this issue. See <http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu>. > > 2. This seems to be quite major version update, are you sure you want > > to upload this to unstable in freeze? > > What do you mean with "unstable in freeze"? If you think that it should > be in other place just tell me and we will put it in other place. Generally uploading new library version to unstable while freeze is not a good idea. See freeze announcement for more details - <http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2010/08/msg00000.html>. > > 3. You dropped dietlibc support without single mention in changelog/NEWS > > Didn't know if you should mention that or where mention it, maybe I > should not drop the support, whats your thoughts about it? I have no idea whether it was used or not, but it seems like some major feature removal, so it would deserve at least note in changelog or NEWS, see <http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-news-debian>. > > > 4. Manually creating postinst/postrm is really not needed, just use > > debhelper. > > Ok, I'll take a more deep look on all the tools of debhelper maybe I > missed something. > > > 5. Why is there another tarball and debian directory in .orig.tar.gz? > > Please check how the source package should look like. > > I was running a command to generate de .origin.tar.gz maybe I forgot > some option to run, I'll check more about that You don't need to generate orig.tar.gz, that should be just renamed upstream tarball. > > 6. Ever heard about lintian? > > I: matrixssl source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field "section" in package libmatrixssl3.1 > > I: matrixssl source: duplicate-long-description libmatrixssl3.1-dev libmatrixssl3.1 libmatrixssl3.1-doc > > I: matrixssl source: missing-debian-source-format > > W: matrixssl source: changelog-should-not-mention-nmu > > I: matrixssl source: debian-watch-file-is-missing > > Of course, but I didn't saw those problems, can you send me the options > I should use ? The I: warnings are generated by passing -I option to lintian. They are usually good things to fix, but not necessarily a bugs. > I sent a RFS a few weeks ago with more details I think[2], thanks for you fast > answer, > > [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=544057 > [2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2010/09/msg00175.html -- Michal Čihař | http://cihar.com | http://blog.cihar.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature