Hi Thomas! On 30/09/2012 09:06, Thomas Goirand wrote: > Your packaging git is on Github, any reason why you don't use Alioth > instead? I would definitively like to use Alioth instead of GitHub but when I did the first version I was not sure about using collab-maint or a dedicated project. Moreover at the time of this first version, I was not a DM yet (I am now since 6 weeks) and I needed an advocate to join collab-maint (if using collab-maint). So I thought it was better to find a sponsor to figure out with him where to host the packaging sources. > I've tried it (currently running it on my Wheezy laptop), and I like it! :) I am happy that you like it. I think it is a good compromise between GNOME 2 and GNOME shell and actually it best suits my need for daily work: this is why I've packaged it. > Did you take the packaging work directly from Mint? What exactly did you > change from them? Actually, I started initially from their package but I quickly discovered that they did not put too much attention to the Debian packaging: they've imported it from the Ubuntu gnome-shell package and just minimally adapted to the need of the fork. There were few glitches. So at that point I decided mainly to reuse only the dependency part of their control file and to redo the rest: Updating the new Debian policy using dh sequencer instead of CDBS Updating to the compatibility level of debhelper 9 Removing the useless break/replace fields Making debian/copyright DEP5 compliant fixing lintian warning/error adding a working debian/watch Adding a debug package applied few patches that have been accepted stream in between ... Well you can consider that besides reusing an updated dependency lists in the control file and the same subdivision of packages, everything else have been changed. Do you consider to sponsor it? :-) Cheers, Nicolas Bourdaud
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature