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

Bug#1023143: RFS: xfce4-calculator-plugin/0.7.1-1 [ITP] -- calculator plugin for Xfce panel



Hi. Thanks a lot for your review and hints.

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 7:02 PM Wookey <wookey@wookware.org> wrote:
> The description could be more useful.
> "The plugin supports common mathematical operators (+, -, *, /, ^) with usual
>  precedence rules, and some common functions such as abs(x), sqrt(x), sin(x)
>  and cos(x)."

If it were possible, I wouldn't even write a long description for this
package. I feel like repeating what's already there in the short
description is counter-productive, and Xfce panel plugins are Xfce
panel plugins. They depend on having xfce4-panel and anyone who's ever
used Xfce knows where their panel is, what their panel has. Besides,
I'm completely lost as to what else I can say here (aka lacking
creativity). It is an Xfce panel plugin (determined by its name
already), provides a calculator functionality on the Xfce panel
(again, it's in the name). Hence,

> It needs to say what this _is_. Perhaps something like
>  "Provides on-screen calculator from toolbar", then details as above.

would be wrong, and even with corrections, pointless and/or duplicated info.

> I'd add Adrian Dimitrov <enzo_01@abv.bg> to the copyright list

Nice catch! Surprisingly, neither `debmake` nor `licensecheck` listed
Adrian Dimitrov. I'm not sure why, though. It looks like he's only
involved in panel-plugins/calculator.c. Manual grepping doesn't reveal
any more copyright holders, and unfortunately the test suite is also
authorless. I also did a big whoopsie and forgot to include debian/*
and myself in the copyright file. I'll fix these.

> and the package includes the LGPL COPYING.LIB at top level, although it's not obvious if that actually applies to any of the code.
> If it does then the LGPL should be listed (maybe you already checked this?).

To be honest, I struggle with such things a bit. Let me contact
upstream for their explanation and rationale for including LGPL in the
source tree.

Cheers,
Akbar.


Reply to: