Re: RFS: conque
Hello,
This email is a reply to three emails, so please excuse the length.
On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> wrote:
> Please run lintian on *.changes file. That way lintian will check not only
> binaries, but also the source package (and possibly more).
DONE
> debian/README.Debian:
> - The text is oddly wrapped...
DONE
> - There is a typo: "not enable" -> "not enabled". Since this template
DONE
> appears to be copied over and over from the policy document to various
> READMEs, it'd nice if the template were reviewed by debian-l10n-english@
> people. Would you care to file a bug against src:vim (which contains the
> policy text)?
DONE
> - "See Section 4 for more info on this." - this sentence was not supposed to
> be copied to your README.
DONE
> - Contrary to what the README says, the add-on *is* enabled by default.
> This might be due to some packaging bugs.
DONE
>
> VERSION, debian/VERSION (and debian/docs):
> - What are these files for?
>
REMOVED
> conque.doc-base:
> - This is file not used during build, it refers to files that don't exist...
>
REMOVED
> debian/conqueterm.1:
> - What is the manual page for? Section 1 is for "executable programs or
> shell commands" but the binary package doesn't ship anything like that. I'd
> expect help for the add-on to be available via the vim's :help command, not
> in a oddly-formatted manual page...
>
REMOVED
> debian/control:
> - Use "debhelper (>= 8)" rather than "debhelper (>= 8.0.0)".
DONE
> - What is build-dependency on sharutils for?
REMOVED
> - The package could be "Architecture: all". Similarly, you can remove
DONE
> ${shlib:Depends} from Depends.
DONE
> - Your vim dependency ("vim | gvim") is incorrect. In fact the addon doesn't
> work with vim.basic, provided by package "vim". The package needs a vim that
> is linked with libpython.
The plugin is operational in vim-tiny, operational in the sense that
it complains that it needs a python linked vim in a scratch window. We
could patch that to say the debian specific way to get that would be
to install vim-gtk
However invoking ":ConqueTerm bash" in vim.tiny results in "E492: Not
an editor command: ConqueTerm bash". man vim-tiny *or* vim.tiny path
was not of particular help.
>We have quite a few such vims, but fortunately all
> of them provide virtual package "vim-python".
vim-python is a virtual package, it was a transition package in lenny.
The source of the virutal package was vim-gtk. I have made the binary
depend on vim-gtk. Moreover depending on vim-python gave a lintian
error. This is my rationale for depending on vim-gtk rather than
vim-python.
> - I'd omit "Plugin is only usable if you have vim-gtk (or vim-python)
> installed" from package description. This is what we have Depends for.
DONE
> debian/copyright:
> - The file doesn't include the most important part: the actual upstream
> license!
DONE
> - According to the DEP-5 specifications, format URI should be versioned,
> while yours is not.
I am confused
Format: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5
Does not do ??
clicking on http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5 and going to the example
section gives
Format: <VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL> but i have no idea what a valid value
for <VERSIONED_FORMAT_URL> would be.
> - This is of course personal choice, but I would recommend you not to use a
> more restrictive license for Debian packaging than the upstream uses.
>
DONE
> (More review later...)
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:09 AM, Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> wrote:
> * Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org>, 2011-08-28, 17:33:
>>>
>>> To access further information about this package, please visit the
>>> following URL:
>>>
>>> http://mentors.debian.net/package/conque
>>>
>>> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
>>>
>>> dget -x
>>> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/conque/conque_2.2-1.dsc
>>>
>>> I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.
>>
> [...]
>>
>> (More review later...)
>
> As promised:
>
> debian/control:
> - There's a trailing space in the very first line.
I could not find it, linitian is not complaining, but i had missed a
space in line 12. I have added it
>
> debian/copyright:
> - You wrote "Copyright: 2011 nicoraffo <nicoraffo@gmail.com>", but copyright
> statements in the upstream source look like this: "Copyright (C)
> 2009-__YEAR__ Nico Raffo". Why don't use his real name in the copyright
> file? Please tell upstream to replace __YEAR__ with the actual year and then
> use this range in the copyright file.
DONE
>
> debian/install:
> - This is in direct violation of Packaging Policy for Vim, section 3.1:
> "Addons should not be installed directly under a directory contained in the
> Vim runtime path."
> - In addition to that, /usr/share/vim/vimcurrent is a symlink, so putting
> any files there is a really bad idea. Just think what will happen with your
> package once the symlink start point to another directory...
The contents of the autoload directory in the package tree needs to be
in the vimcurrent path. If the contents of the autoload directory are
not logically in
/usr/share/vimcurrent/autload/ and the plugin is started, the
following message is displayed
E117:Unknownfunction:conque_term#open.
I will ask on the vim list and get back.
>
> debian/watch:
> - It's missing. Please write one.
DONE
>
> syntax/conque_term.vim:
> - This is weird, why does it talk about MySQL?! Also, is there a way to turn
> off syntax highlighting? It's mostly annoying.
About this, the upstream author advised me to look at
:help ConqueTerm_Syntax
>
> --
> Jakub Wilk
>
>
On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 1:05 AM, Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> wrote:
> * harish badrinath <harishbadrinath@gmail.com>, 2011-08-29, 11:56:
>>>
>>> - Your vim dependency ("vim | gvim") is incorrect. In fact the addon
>>> doesn't work with vim.basic, provided by package "vim". The package needs a
>>> vim that is linked with libpython. We have quite a few such vims, but
>>> fortunately all of them provide virtual package "vim-python".
>>
>> So depends on vim-python|gvim-python ??
Discussed Above
>
> There is no such package "gvim-python"...
NOTED
>
>> The pkg-vim mailing list seems to be dead (check the mailing list archive,
>> spammy links posted is "activity" for the last few months).
>
> Really? I just took a look at last month archive[0] and there are:
> - 38 messages from BTS (including a dozen about closed bugs);
> - 22 messages about commits to the VCS;
> - 6 messages from dak and britney about uploads and testing migration;
> - 5 spam messages.
>
> I wouldn't call it "dead".
I was talking about
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-vim-group/
although it was my mistake in not giving out the actual link i was
talking about.
>
> BTW, I filed the bug about typo myself: http://bugs.debian.org/640042
Thanks
> [0]
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-vim-maintainers/2011-August/thread.html
>
> --
> Jakub Wilk
>
Harish
Reply to: