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

Re: Re: RFS: faenza-icon-theme



On 24.01.2011 20:31, Julien Valroff wrote:

> As I use this icon theme, I had a quick look at your package, here are my
> comments.

> Why have you chosen to repack the upstream tarball?

I didn't see a reason why not to :-/

> Your package doesn't
> contain the upstream changelog, nor the README which lists some known
> problems and might be useful for the end user.

Yes, I'll make sure all of this in next push, since I deliberately removed it.

> You might also want to ship the emesene theme as a separate package.

Okay

> Your package doesn't set the distributor-logo nor the start-here icon, which
> might be nice to have.

I hardcoded start-here icon to Debian icon, both theme displays Debian
start-here icons.

> In the description, "Gnome" should be written in uppercase: it is an acronym
> for GNU Object Model Environment.

I'm aware, my bad.

> btw is this theme specific to GNOME or can it be used with other desktop
> environments?

Specific for GNOME.

> If so, you might want to check with the GNOME team whether your package
> should be renamed to follow a naming scheme (looking at what is already in
> the archive, it could be gnome-*-icon-theme or gnome-icon-theme-*).

Will do.

> wrt copyright information: you state the icons are shipped under the GPL
> version 3 or later. As far as I could check, it is shipped under the GPL
> version 3 only.

I'll have this fixed.

> Also, your copyright file doesn't fully respect the DEP-5 format, check the
> output of the DEP-5 validator/parser [0].

Okay ...

> Hope this helps.

It does, thank you for you input!

On 24 Jan 2011 20:54:02 +0100, Michael Biebl wrote:

> The package has a recommends: gnome, this looks like the wrong way around to me
> and with recommends being installed by default and gnome being a metapackage
> with huge dependencies I'd suggest to remove that.

I couldn't agree more, thanks for pointing this one out!

I'll make sure both of what you two mentioned is fixed in next push.

Thanks,


Adnan


Reply to: