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

Bug#912427: RFS: urlwatch/2.15-1



Le mercredi 31 octobre 2018 à 13:36:05+0100, Maxime Werlen a écrit :
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
> 
> Dear mentors,
> 
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "urlwatch"
> 
>  * Package name    : urlwatch
>    Version         : 2.15-1
>    Upstream Author : Thomas Perl
>  * URL             : https://thp.io/2008/urlwatch/
>  * License         : BSD-3-clause
>    Section         : web
> 
> It builds those binary packages:
>   urlwatch   - tool for monitoring webpages for updates
> 
> To access further information about this package, please visit the
> following URL:
>   https://mentors.debian.net/package/urlwatch
> 
> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
>   dget -x https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/u/urlwatch/urlwatch_2.15-1.dsc
> 
> More information about urlwatch can be obtained from
> https://github.com/thp/urlwatch.
> 
> Changes since the last upload:
> 
> urlwatch (2.15-1) unstable; urgency=medium
> 
>   * New upstream release

Hi Maxime,

I'll take care of this.

First, your salsa repo doesn't have neither an upstream branch nor a
pristine-tar one. When packaging python packages it's a good practise to
follow the python packaging teams guidelines[1], even if you don't intend to
have the team comaintain the package.

It's not an issue for sponsorship but I think it could be worth considering
re-making the repository following these guidelines. It enables to have a
clear history of the different upstream releases, a history of the tarballs
you used for extracting these releases plus your master branch. If you need
some help I'm eager to provide input. :)

Can you upgrade the d/watch version, please?

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Python/GitPackaging

-- 
Pierre-Elliott Bécue
GPG: 9AE0 4D98 6400 E3B6 7528  F493 0D44 2664 1949 74E2
It's far easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: