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

Re: RFS: filecheck



Hi!

On Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 05:03:45PM +0800, Bo YU wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Thanks for reviewing my package!
> 
> 
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 3:51 AM Emmanuel Arias <eamanu@yaerobi.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 02:46:36PM -0300, Emmanuel Arias wrote:
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 07, 2023 at 09:34:43PM +0800, Bo YU wrote:
> > > > Hi team!
> > > >
> > > > Due to rfs bot maybe not work on debian-python irc, So I am seeking help
> > > > to review/upload my new python package:
> > > >
> > > > https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/filecheck
> > > >
> > > > TIA.
> > > To avoid duplicated work from another team member, I mention here, I'm
> > > going to review this package.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Emmanuel
> >
> > Hi!,
> >
> > Me again.
> >
> > I leave you some comments regarding to FileCheck
> >
> > * Binary package suggests install the docs package, but is not in
> >   d/control.
> Done. Here the ideal situation should be a docs package on there, but if we use
> sphinx-build to build its doc, there is one guzzle_sphinx_theme does
> not in Debian.
> So I package its manpage to binary package.

OK.

> 
> > * Package should depends on python3-poetry-core instead of python3-poetry
> Done.
> 
> > * d/copyright: upstream does not specify a range of date 2019-2023, only in
> >   docs/conf.py the copyright says 2019.
> Yeah, although there are only one file flaged its date on 2019, but
> how to judge the
> whole project copyright date range? I just follow its the first commit:
> 
> https://github.com/mull-project/FileCheck.py/commits/main?after=195aa1527a2572b4697ae0d5c604f0baceba805c+419&branch=main&qualified_name=refs%2Fheads%2Fmain
> 
> Not sure this is right.

I'd just use 2019, not a range.

> 
> > * The package synopsis should not finished with a period. Please remove it.
> Sorry, I am not very clear about here. Do you mean here:
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/filecheck/-/blob/debian/main/debian/control#L30
> If yes, I think the synopsis solution should be more robust here.
> Because it saves more space than
> specially descriptions.
> 
> please let me know if there is not true.

Sorry, perhaps I was not clear, I mean remove the period at the end of
line 20 [0].

> 
> > * The binary package should not be python3-filecheck?
> You hint me here. So I spilted the origin package into python3 library
> package and
> its binary tool binary. this should be working.
> 
> I have updated the package on salsa:
> https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/filecheck
> 
> Thanks again for reviewing the package!
> 
> BR,
> Bo
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Emmanuel
> > > >
> > > > BR,
> > > > Bo
> > > >
> >
> >

The rest looks good to me.

[0] https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/packages/filecheck/-/blob/debian/main/debian/control#L20

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: