Re: [Python-modules-team] RFS: py3cairo
Hi,
Thank you for your advice.
I uploaded modified version to mentors.
On Thu, 8 Mar 2012 22:00:00 +0100
Jakub Wilk <jwilk@debian.org> wrote:
>
> * Koichi Akabe <vbkaisetsu@gmail.com>, 2012-03-08, 21:49:
> >http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/py3cairo/py3cairo_1.10.0+dfsg-1.dsc
>
> I don't intend to sponsor this package, but here's my quick review:
>
> Please inject the package to the team's repository and set
> Vcs-{Svn,Browser} fields in debian/control.
>
I don't have permission to access the vcs now, so I requested to join in this team.
> ${python3:Provides} is evil[0], please don't use it.
Okay. I removed Provides on this package.
>
> Do you really need python3-sphinx? The command line tools are provided
> by both python-sphinx and python3-sphinx (the former is much more
> popular) and you don't do anything to ensure that they are actually run
> with Python 3.X.
I changed it to "python-sphinx (>= 1.0.7+dfsg) | python3-sphinx". dh_sphinxdoc requires it.
>
> Copyright format URI should have a trailing slash.
Okay.
>
> In line 27 of your copyright file, you have a License field without
> short license name. This is not allowed.
This is the old style MIT license. I added short license name.
>
> Please consider using dh_sphinxdoc instead of manually symlinking
> JavaScript code. dh_sphinxdoc it's more future-proof.
I added a flag "--with sphinxdoc" and added ${sphinxdoc:Depends} on python3-cairo-doc Depends.
>
> Please build extension modules for all supported Python 3 versions, not
> only for the default one. (Admittedly, it's not easy to test it, since
> currently only version is supported.)
I updated it using py3versions and "for" loop. It will build for all versions.
>
> Upstream provides a test suite. Please run it at build time (ideally
> using all supported Python 3 versions).
This test suite is for py.test, however it doesn't support Python3.
It's difficult to run. Can I skip it?
>
> Please provide get-orig-source target.
Okay. I added get-orig-source target.
>
> While Developer's Reference and Debian Policy disagree on where should
> repacking be documented (bug #561494), README.Debian is certainly wrong
> place. It should be either copyright file or README.source.
Okay. I changed the location to README.source
>
> I don't quite understand why you mentioned rebuilding Sphinx
> documentation in README.Debian. It's not something unusual...
I wrote details of it. The compiled documentation contains a binary "objects.inv"
>
>
> [0] Rationale: http://lists.debian.org/20110324164804.GA5919@jwilk.net
>
> --
> Jakub Wilk
--
Koichi Akabe
vbkaisetsu at {gmail.com, debian.or.jp}
Reply to: