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

Bug#670851: RFS: plotter/2.2-1[ITP]



Ralf Jung wrote:
> > I took a look at your package; here are a few comments:
> Thanks a lot for your detailed review!

You're welcome!

> >   - In debian/copyright, you have a license paragraph called "GPL-2"
> >     that states: "either version 2 of the License, or (at your option)
> >     any later version"; so either this paragraph should be called
> >     "GPL-2+", or you should correct the text of the license. From the
> >     license headers in the source, it seems to be the latter; that's a
> >     problem because part of the files in the package are licensed under
> >     the GPL-3 or LGPL-3, which are incompatible with the GPL-2 [1].
> >     Please sort it out.
> > 
> >     [1] http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GNUGPL
> The source files are GPL-2 without "or later", I just copied the wrong license 
> header into the copyright file.

Then you need to replace the (L)GPL-3 files with some GPLv2-compatible
equivalent.

> >     For the tri-licensed files, see [2] for the correct syntax.
> > 
> >     [2]
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/#stand-al
> > one-license-paragraph
> > 
> >   - The man page is quite short and essentially repeats the long
> >     description of the package (which presumably the user has already
> >     read before installing the package). It would be more useful to take
> >     elements from manual.html and manual_graph.html. Also, please
> >     consider removing the AUTHOR section (see man-pages(7)).
> I did not know that the AUTHOR section is discouraged, sorry - maybe it should 
> be removed from the example in
> /usr/share/debhelper/dh_make/debian/manpage.1.ex
> which is where I got it from (this is the first manpage I wrote).
> Is it appropriate to report a bug against dh-make?

Sure, reporting it wouldn't be a bad idea.

> >   - You install the German changelog as
> >     /usr/share/doc/plotter/changelog.gz, where most users would expect
> >     to find an English version; would you consider providing a
> >     translation?
> Done.
> 
> > 
> >   - In debian/rules, you could avoid overriding dh_install by using a
> >     debian/plotter.install file; see dh_install(1). Same for
> >     dh_auto_clean, see dh_clean(1).
> Done for clean. However, in dh_install, I also convert the upstream png icon 
> to xpm, which is necessary for the entry in menu to work with an icon.
> Should I do this in another rule instead?

Well, I think it would make sense to do it after dh_auto_build, but it's
fine if you want to keep the dh_install override as-is.

> >   - Your long description should mention how plotter compares to similar
> >     programs, such as qtiplot or gnuplot [3].
> > 
> >     [3]
> > http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practic
> > es.html#bpp-pkg-desc
> > 
> >   - Please run "wrap-and-sort -as" (or simply "wrap-and-sort" if you
> >     prefer) in the root of your package.
> Done.
> 
> When I re-upload the package with the remaining fixes, should I keep the 
> current version  number or should I increase it to 2.2-2 and mention the fixes 
> in the changelog? I suppose the latter is right, but I was told to clear the 
> changelog before the initial upload to mentors, so I figured I'd better ask.

>From what I gather, most sponsors prefer the debian version _not_ to be
incremented, so that the first upload has only one changelog entry.

Cheers,

-- 
Benoît Knecht



Reply to: