[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Hello, and, (RFS) packaged!: rocaml (#451795)

Hi Michael,

On Sun, 2010-11-14 at 11:00 +0100, Michael Tautschnig wrote:
> Thank you very much for your interest in Debian and I'm happy to welcome a new
> contributor!

Thank you very much! I appreciate it! :-)

> So here's some notes on your package:
> - I think your "Suggests:" should be upgraded to a "Recommends:", because rocaml
>   will be pretty useless without ruby and ocaml being installed.

Good point. I should've paid closer attention to the semantic difference
between the two.

> - Your package should be Architecture: all, there is nothing platform-specific
>   in this package.

Similarly, the difference between any/all had yet to catch my eye.

> - As this is a fresh package please consider to follow DEP-5 formatting
>   guidelines for debian/copyright (http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/)

Nice! I'll do so. It seems a shame that dh_make's template `copyright'
isn't in a format more amenable to DEP-5. I suppose it's not official
policy yet.

> - No need to ship GPL and LICENSE files, the information is in debian/copyright
>   already.

An excellent point.

> - You refer to rocaml as a binary when you really mean a script.

Yes - I think I kept thinking of `binary' as `anything executable,'
whereas your distinction is correct.

> - debian/README.source: Read the contents of the file and act accordingly :-)

I knew there would be _one_ obvious mistake like that ...

> - I wonder whether you really need a Makefile; you could probably just do this
>   via a debian/install and debian/dirs file; but that's a matter of taste.

Actually, it's nicer overall to let dpkg handle that for me, as you say.
I'll probably rework it to do that before I try again.

> - The upstream package ships and example and a test directory. It might be good
>   to make use of both of them (that is, ship examples with the Debian package
>   and run tests at build time).

Good point. The examples are already shipped, although they're installed
through the Makefile currently. IIRC I can just use a debian/*.examples
file to do that for me, so consider it done.

> - extconf.rb and all the examples and test files lack copyright and license
>   information. Please pursue upstream to fix this right away, otherwise it
>   cannot be distributed.

Upstream contacted. When I clear this up, I'll update the package on
mentors and return here.

Thanks very much (again!) for your clear and concise guidepoints. It
means a lot to me as someone very new to packaging :-)

> Hope this helps,
> Michael


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: