Bug#921482: RFS: note/1.3.26-3
[2019-02-05 23:48] eamanu15 <emmanuelarias30@gmail.com>
> Package: sponsorship-requests
> Severity: normal
> X-Debbugs-CC: KAction@debian.org
>
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "note"
>
> * Package name : note
> Version : 1.3.26-3
> Upstream Author : Thomas von Dein <valid-until-13-Feb-2019 AT daemon.de
> <valid-until-25-Jan-2019@daemon.de>>
> * URL : http://www.daemon.de/NOTE
> * License : Gnu Public License(GPL)
> Section : utils
>
> It builds those binary packages:
>
> note - small program managing notes from commandline
> [...]
> Changes since the last upload:
>
> * Add me to Maintainer Field on d/control:
> - For some reason that I ignore the Maintainer field
> on d/control was not updated.
Sorry, I do not understand this sentense. Mind to simplify explaination
what changed?
> * Update fix-spelling.patch because is old.
Wording is strange. "because is old" is not full sentense. Usually, this
process is called patch refresh (quilt terminology), like
* Refresh `fix-spelling.patch'
> * Delete NOTEDB folder and NOTEDB.pm because they are
> not on upstream from ad6cb95 commit (Github).
What is ad6cb95 commit? For person who do not follow upstream
development, this changelog entry brings more questions, then
explainations.
> * Delete install.sh.
> - This file was forgotten to be deleted by the
> upstream author.
> - delete-install.patch was created
Line splitting is odd. First sub-entry fits 75 columns.
Also, why create patch to remove file? Does existence of this file
breaks build process?
In general, it is perfectly fine to ignore files upstream ship in
release and do not use it. Autotools-based releases ship `configure'
script, but we at Debian ignore it and regenerate it ourself.
> * Update d/watch file to download the upstream version from CPAN repository.
I'd elaborate this entry and added, that previously `debian/watch' used
author personal site.
--
Note, that I send and fetch email in batch, once every 24 hours.
If matter is urgent, try https://t.me/kaction
--
Reply to: