Cédric Boutillier escreveu isso aí: > Hi Augusto! > > On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:05:40AM -0700, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > > > IMO it's better to keep the manpage in pod format in the source package > > and generate the .1 file during package build, and remove it when > > cleaning, than storing troff code in the repository since that is pretty > > much gibberish for normal people. :-) > > > When I convert existing packages I usually keep the original maintainers > > as uploaders together with me, I don't known what others think about > > that but I think this is a good thing to do. > > > lintian reports a spelling error in the manpage text, you could fix > > that. > > Thank you for your comments. > > I followed your recommendations. I also added two patches to remove rubygems > requirements and $LOAD_PATH modifications in the tests, which are still > deactivated, waiting for depencies. > > In the mean time, I think I slightly messed up with the git history. Sorry for > that :( > > What do you think of the state of the package now? It looks like a lot of -- if not all -- files in ext/ are actually 'Copyright (C) 2007 David L Parsons', so debian/copyrigh must have an entry for those files. Also, you added a patch to remove the $LOAD_PATH manipulation mess in the tests, but you didn't enable them to run at build time: debian/ruby-tests.rb is all commented out. Other thing: you added patches that are not applied in the Git repository, so you need to make sure they are unapplied after build (otherwise you cannot build the package again with git-buildpackage, for example). See for example point 2 in Raphael's tips post: https://raphaelhertzog.com/2010/11/18/4-tips-to-maintain-a-3-0-quilt-debian-source-package-in-a-vcs/ -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature