On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 17:29:59 +0300 Ileana Dumitrescu <ileanadumitrescu95@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you for the feedback! I made changes as you suggested. There > is a new upstream version that I also included in the new package. Great! The copyright stuff is a chore on packages like this, so thanks alot for seeing that through. > Reading debian package policy I noticed that removing files from a > tarball for a repack (as Bastian suggested in bug #1019714) should > require a +ds suffix, so I packaged the new version with > 2022.10.25+ds-1. Please let me know if I did this incorrectly or if > this should not be done for this package. Indeed, a repacksuffix is used to indicate changes were made to an upstream release so that's perfectly fine this way. Typically, +dfsg is used to signal the source was repacked for DFSG compliance reasons and +ds when repacking for some other reason. I did just notice the upstream release contains several other files worth considering for removal: a bunch of windows executables [1]. > > + E: pipenv: python-traceback-in-manpage is a false positive, > please override. > > This did not show up in lintian with the new upstream version. It seems they revamped the manpage, although the new one also earns a lintian hit [1], this time about a bad (missing?) 'whatis' entry. Lintian seems to think the source for some html file is missing, but at first glance that hit may well be a false positive triggered by some bits of javascript. Unrelated to any of the above, I pushed some minor changes and enabled the CI on salsa. [1]https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/pipenv/-/jobs/3434663
Attachment:
pgpn3L8j9B_M5.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature