Bug#1078267: RFS: markdown/1.0.1-13 [ITA] [RC] -- Text-to-HTML conversion tool
Hi Soren, thanks for taking the time to look at this! Sorry if formatting is off, I'm writing from my phone.
I'll reply in-line below.
Il 12 agosto 2024 21:55:03 CEST, Soren Stoutner <soren@debian.org> ha scritto:
>1. markdown source: quilt-patch-missing-description [debian/patches/
>debian.patch]
>
>Could you please add a description to this patch?
I thought at this, but as I haven't written the patch myself I'm not sure what to write. It's a patch that Bastian created while converting the package to the 3.0 (quilt) source format. Since it does different things, I might try to split it up in different smaller patches and document them individually. Does it make sense to you?
>2. I: markdown source: upstream-metadata-missing-repository [debian/upstream/
>metadata]
>
>I’m assuming this is because the upstream doesn’t have a repository, just a
>tarball download (the little investigation I did indicated that might be
>true). If that is the case, please override this lintian tag with a
>description in the comment as to why.
Yeah, upstream never head a Git repository. I'll add an override as you suggest.
>3. P: markdown source: silent-on-rules-requiring-root [debian/control]
>
>I am assuming your program doesn’t require root to build (few do). If so,
>please add the line “Rules-Requires-Root: no” to debian/control.
That's a false positive. Rules-Requires-Root: no is already implied by the build dependency on dpkg-build-api (= 1). Please see dpkg-build-api(7) and bug #1057176. I also think that adding a lintian override is wrong since this should really be fixed lintian-side.
>4. It might be nice to include an explanation in the binary package
>description that this is the original markdown program and some indication of
>how this relates to other implementations and under which circumstances
>someone would like to install this compared to other versions. This is
>optional and I leave it up to your discretion if you would like to do so and
>how it would be best worded.
Makes sense, I'll do it later today.
Thanks again! Bye :)
Reply to: