Re: [PING] RFR/RFS: openvpn-auth-radius (new package, fixes retitled RFP)
On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 10:38:46AM +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
Hi,
> Please CC me in a reply, since I am not subscribed to the list.
>
> Could you reconsider this RFS? Two weeks have passed without a response.
* The main technical thing is that I'm not able to double-build the package
in the same location. It seems that the clean target in the makefile only
removes the build object files with a .o suffix. The 'main' file doesn't
have one so it's left behind. Something that should be fixed upstream.
Workaround is to delete it in your clean target in debian/rules.
* I'm not comfortable with the maintainer address set to a company. I've not
yet formed a final opinion on that topic because technically that's just like
any team maintained address but having explicitly a company as the maintainer
is something new (at least for me). Plus I, as the sponsor, am not part of
that team so it's not like sponsoring a team upload but more like sponsoring
an individual maintainer upload. I'm not sure how other people in the project
feel about it.
My main concern as a sponsor in that regard is that you often try to create
some kind of trust relationship to the person maintaining that package but
if you leave the company for whatever reason the people maintaining the package
can change and you can go back to the start. Though if you leave and
subsequently orphan the package we'll technically end up in the same situation.
Another point might be that a company as a maintainer might suggest that this
company has a special role within Debian, donno how innocent users might
react to this. Could be avoided if you'd name it 'Cygnusnetwork Debian Team'
or something like that.
* There is a spurious file debian/clean in the package. Looks like a leftover
from a failed build or something like that. Do you use pbuilder/sbuild or
something similar?
* I would prefer an initial -1 upload. Though that's a matter of personal
taste as far as I remember the discussions on that topic.
* I don't agree with your backport argument against the dh override_ syntax.
backports.debian.org has a dh backport and you only need it to build the
source package. Oh and squeeze is not that far away from a release though I
know about people still runing etch (and I always cry when I hear those
stories). Anyway that's not a show-stopper.
Sven
--
And I don't know much, but I do know this:
With a golden heart comes a rebel fist.
[ Streetlight Manifesto - Here's To Life ]
Reply to: