Hi David, On Mon, Jul 08, 2013 at 05:07:59PM +0200, David Suárez wrote: > Hi, > The following package is ready to be uploaded (I also verified the > points listed on > http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship). > Could you please sponsor them? > ruby-roodi 2.2.0-1 Thanks for your I don't know this software and haven't tried it. But I looked at the packaging and I have a few comments and questions: - debian/control: the short description shouldn't be a full phrases. Leave maybe just Ruby object oriented design inferometer. In principle it shouldn't have capital letters (unless needed). Since it is an acronym, it would be fine but the acronym is again presented in the long description. - put-config-on-roodi-dir branch: is /usr/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/roodi the right place to put the config? I think it would be more appropriate in /etc/ since it is the default configuration for the binary. - History.txt should be installed as the upstream changelog, not as documentation. Use override_dh_installchangelog target in debian/rules for that. - in the bin/* files, I would remove the LOAD_PATH change, since it would be wrong once the files installed in /usr/bin - I don't see why in feature/upgrade-to-rspec2 branch, you changed Rakefile, Gemfile and Gemfile.lock, since they are not used to build the package. Is it a patch you forwarded upstream for inclusion in a later version? - In debian/copyright, the first line of the Expat license Copyright (c) 1998, 1999, 2000 Thai Open Source Software Center Ltd should be removed as it doesn't seem to be related. - rake should be added to Build-Depends: to run tests with ruby1.8 - since bin/roodi seems to be the interesting piece of this gem, shouldn't the package be called roodi instead of ruby-roodi (like what we have for cucumber, yard, chef, etc.? Best wishes, Cédric
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature