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

Bug#925911: marked as done (RFS: lopsub/1.0.2 [ITP])

Your message dated Mon, 29 Apr 2019 16:46:17 +0200
with message-id <20190429144617.GA12908@angband.pl>
and subject line Re: Bug#925911: RFS: lopsub-1.0.2 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #925911,
regarding RFS: lopsub/1.0.2 [ITP]
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
925911: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=925911
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "lopsub":

 * Package name    : lopsub
   Version         : 1.0.2
   Upstream Author : Andre Noll <maan@tuebingen.mpg.de>
 * URL             : http://people.tuebingen.mpg.de/maan/lopsub/
 * License         : (L)GPLv3
   Section         : libdevel

It builds the following package:

lopsup - The Long Option Parser for Subcommands

To access further information about this package, please visit the
above URL.

About lopsub: It's not a new idea to provide a library for parsing
command line options as there are libargtable2 and gengetopt which are
conceptually similar. Nevertheless, here is yet another option parser
which was written already some years ago. Compared to the existing
option parsers, lopsub offers a couple of additional features, for
example support for subcommands and direct man page generation.
It is actively maintained, yet mature, and the API is stable and
well documented.

Although no debian packages use the lopsub library so far, it makes
sense to get this in because (a) it makes life easier for people who
want to use software that depends on lopsub [1], and (b) it paves the
way to debianize those software packages as well. Moreover, lopsub
is tiny and has no build dependencies other than a C compiler, flex
and m4. The binary package has no dependency other than libc.

This is my first attempt to get a package sponsored, and also my
first attempt to create a debian package. I've tried to address
the issues listed in the docs and I believe the package is ready
for upload. However, there are still some warnings from lintian
I don't know how to deal with. While there is certainly some room for
improvement, I'm confident that the remaining issues can be addressed
easily.

You can grab a copy by running

	git clone git://git.tuebingen.mpg.de/lopsub.git

This will get you three branches: master, pu, and t/debian

The t/debian branch contains a single commit on top of master which
adds the debian/ directory with the usual files in it. The commands

	git checkout origin/t/debian
	dpkg-buildpackage

should build the debian package as expected. This has been tested
on debian-9 and debian-10.

This package is known to compile and work on Debian and Ubuntu Linux
(x86_64, x86_32, armv6l), FreeBSD-12.0 (x86_64) and NetBSD-8.0
(x86_64).

Thanks
Andre
---
[1] http://people.tuebingen.mpg.de/maan/
-- 
Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology
Max-Planck-Ring 5, 72076 Tübingen, Germany. Phone: (+49) 7071 601 829
http://people.tuebingen.mpg.de/maan/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 03:05:42PM +0200, Andre Noll wrote:
> > Done. Please have a final look. If everything is fine, I can merge
> > the various topic branches to master (so that master becomes what is
> > pu now), and tag the result as v1.0.3.
> 
> Ping

Pong.

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Did ya know that typing "test -j8" instead of "ctest -j8"
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ will make your testsuite pass much faster, and fix bugs?
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀

--- End Message ---
Reply to: