Re: RFS: python-patch 1.16
Hi Mattia,
It is still in my TODO list to process your detailed feedback to the RFS I sent to the mailing list (thanks BTW !).
I think I should manage to do that before May but I'm always happy if anybody steps in.
I'll CC the ITP bug as well...
Paolo
Il 04/04/2017 19:31, Mattia Rizzolo ha scritto:
> Hey Paolo, any news of this package?
> (explicitly CCing you to be extra sure it'll reach you)
>
> (And this is why I prefer RFS bugs, btw, saving me from digging in my
> mail archive to find this one…)
>
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 06:17:40PM +0100, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:20:23AM +0100, Paolo Greppi wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> FYI, I found your RFS only thanks to the /topic in #debian-python.
>> Unless you're very lucky most RFSes sent to random mailing lists have a
>> tendency to get lost/ignored; that's why I suggest you always file a RFS
>> bug and X-Debbugs-CC the relevant team, unless you know that team is
>> going to react (like pkg-js recently).
>>
>>> I packaged python-patch as per this ITP:
>>> https://bugs.debian.org/845482, this is the repo:
>>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/packages/python-patch.git
>>>
>>> Please someone more experienced than me review it and if it's OK sponsor
>>> its upload.
>>
>> I fixed the file name in the pristine-tar branch (otherwise `origtargz`
>> ignored it..).
>>
>>> Please note that since the pypi tarball has no tests, whereas the github
>>> tarball has no setup, I choose the latter and added the setup.py with a
>>> git-dpm/quilt patch. I hope this is correct.
>>
>> Yep, that's fine. Please ask upstream to syncronize both, and have
>> github ship the setup.py, and the tarball the release.
>>
>>
>> more changes I ask you:
>> * d/changelog:
>> + please kill the second changelog line; first uploads should only
>> come with a "first upload" line
>> + finalize it (dch -r)
>> * d/control:
>> + please wrap-and-sort that list of build-deps
>> + why are you commenting out the Testsuite field?
>> + Vcs-* are pointing to a repo that's not DPMT's, that's wrong
>> (furthermore that URL first requires auth, and it gave me a 404, so
>> I think it's a private repo)
>> * d/compat:
>> + please bump to 10 (d/control already have the >= 10, so I guess you
>> just forgot to push this one too)
>> * d/rules:
>> + please repspect DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS=nocheck
>> + please use the method provided by pybuild to properly run the tests
>> against all supported python versions, against what you just
>> "built"; I think that one runs only one python version (2.7)
>> against the original sources.
>> + you're overriding dh_auto_install when you only want to append
>> --install-script to the command invoked. Please use
>> PYBUILD_INSTALL_ARGS=--install-scripts=... instead.
>> * d/copyright:
>> + why are you licensing debian/ under a different license?
>> + personally I find a lot more readable to have all the file paragraph
>> at the top, and all stand alone licenses at the bottom
>> + other/pack.py is under another license
>> * I: python-patch: new-package-should-not-package-python2-module python-patch
>> + right, I was about to forget about this...
>> * I: python-patch source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field "section" in package python-patch
>>
>> --
>> regards,
>> Mattia Rizzolo
>>
>> GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
>> more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
>> Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
>> Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
>
>
>
Reply to: