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

Bug#706361: gti review



Thanks again for another round of review! I think I've addressed all the
comments now, and have uploaded a new version. Note that the version number
changed again, since upstream merged the patch that I forwarded. The package
is now available from

  http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gti/gti_1.1.1-1.dsc

Specific responses inline, like last time:

On Fri, May 24 07:07, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> You can do it and on some occasions I overridden some pedantic
> warnings to acknowledge that I've had a look at it and no further
> action is necessary. I found overrides useful with maintaining many
> packages where I tend to forget whenever I already dealt with the
> warning in particular package.
> 
> But it is important to recognise unnecessary overrides such as those
> that tell you about problems that can be addressed by you or by
> upstream developer(s). It is not good to silence such warnings so the
> best would be to keep them as reminders however unimportant they may
> appear.
> 
> "No upstream changelog" can remind you to include changelog if/when
> upstream decide to add it or it may be a reminder to suggest upstream
> to ship it. Also you may choose to generate changelog if you produce
> orig.tar from repository checkout. Perhaps there is no reason to
> silence this particular warning if upstream changelog is not
> shipped...

Thanks for the detailed explanantion, that makes sense.

> Please do not use spaces in short license name -- see examples in
> copyright-format-1.0 specification which clearly state that "License
> names are case-insensitive, and may not contain spaces". Remember I
> suggested to use "MIT-old-style" not "MIT Old Style"? ;)

Oh interesting, I didn't realize that distinction at first. I've updated
the name to use hyphens instead of spaces.

By the way, is this the sort of thing lintian should be checking for? I might
go look into how to add a new rule, if people think that makes sense.

> Thanks. As for usage of "Forwarded" field it is unusual to leave it
> empty.  When your patch have only debian customisation and not useful
> for upstream just use "Forwarded: not-needed" and you can skip long
> explanation (in description) why and how this patch is not useful for
> forwarding.

I've removed the explanantions on the description. I've also changed "no" to
"not-needed" in the "Forwarded" fields. Is there a meaningful difference
between those two forms? The documentation seems to indicate they are
equivalent, but "not-needed" seems clearer.

> I checked updated version and to my taste the car is still moving too
> fast. Of course this is not a problem, just feedback.

Agreed. This version now includes a new patch that slows the car down. It's
now almost exactly the same speed as 'sl'.

Thanks again for looking over everything! Sounds like we're getting near a
a finished, correct, package! Cheers,

Felix

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: