On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 02:15:18PM +0200, Daniel Pocock wrote: > Ok, I guess this can be looked at this as part of the OpenMAMA package > update to get your packaged sponsored > > You have several wnpp bugs, I think the link I gave in the earlier email > is not the one you link in the changelog, so we could use this one instead: > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=732302 Okay. > The lintian report (mentors.debian.net) shows a lot of 'E' and 'W' > messages. It is hard for a sponsor to upload the package while those > exist. If you can remove them, I could then sponsor it. Many of them > are duplicates and some are quite easy to fix, e.g. > > copyright-should-refer-to-common-license-file-for-apache-2 > <http://lintian.debian.org/tags/copyright-should-refer-to-common-license-file-for-apache-2.html> > > is basically telling you the debian/copyright file should refer to > /usr/share/common-licenses/Apache-2.0 I'll fix those straight away. > Also, do you want to track the debian/* files in your qpid-proton > repository or would you like Debian to keep those in a Debian hosted Git > server? For the latter, you just need to create a guest account on > http://alioth.debian.org and send me your username and we can work out a > way for you to put things in Git on alioth. I've created one, mcpierce-guest, and would like to use that to track the packaging changes. > If you let me know about these things and cc the > debian-mentors@lists.debian.org mailing list and the bug we will get > this moving along. Excellent! Thank you. So, just to clarify for myself given the workflow differences between Debian and Fedora, my next step is to update the qpid-proton package, fixing the bugs reported, and upload it via dput against bug#732302? -- Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc. Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
Attachment:
pgpJEPySiGGvw.pgp
Description: PGP signature