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

Bug#820704: RFS: subuser/0.5.6-3 [ITP]



Control: tags -1 + moreinfo

Note that I don't plan to sponsor this package.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 04:33:26PM +0200, Stanislas Leduc wrote:
>   Upstream Author : [fill in name and email of upstream]
> * URL             : [fill in URL of upstreams web site]
> * License         : [fill in]
Huh?

> Changes since the last upload:
> 
> subuser (0.5.6-3) unstable; urgency=medium
> 
>  * New debian revision
This is a wrong way to write changelog entries, see
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch06.en.html#bpp-debian-changelog

>  - Fix bug (closes: #820689)
That's not a correct way to close ITP bugs. The ususal one is "Initial
release (Closes: #820689)". And please don't ship multiple changelog
entries in your first upload (and change the debian version back to 1).

> -- Stanislas Leduc <stanislas.leduc@mailoo.org>  Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:11:10 +0200
> 
> subuser (0.5.6-1) unstable; urgency=medium
> 
>  * New upstream release
This is not a good idea for a first changelog entry either.

>  - Add --update option to dev command
>  - Fix /dev/dri permissions issues
>  - Fix encoding bug when communicating with Docker daemon
>  - Improve support for packaging subuser
Putting upstream changelog entries to debian/changelog is not an accepted
practice either.

Now, from a quick look at the packaging:
- I don't think these overrides are necessary with pybuild
- "Architecture: amd64" sounds wrong
- why B-D contains dh-make?
- Long description is completely wrong (a bonus point for starting it with
  "Furthermore")
- the oldest docker.io version for current packages is 1.6.2 (in
  jessie-backports), no need for ">= 1.3"
- Homepage should be http://subuser.org/ instead of just the code repo
- d/copyright says "LGPL-3" but "either version 3 of the License, or (at
  your option) any later version"
- the source contains docs but they are not packaged

-- 
WBR, wRAR

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: