On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 12:39:39AM +0900, Youhei SASAKI wrote: > Cédric Boutillier <boutil@debian.org> wrote: > > > > My understanding is that the patches will thus be applied as the source > > package is unpacked. Please correct me if I misunderstood this part. > OK. I don't worry about quilt push/pop. > But lintian said that: > W: ruby-fastimage source: missing-runtime-tests-field tests > P: ruby-fastimage source: unknown-runtime-tests-field test-command > How to handle above mentions? Is this a linitan matter? It is just because lintian is lagging a bit in comparision with the debian/tests/control syntax. > > - instead of using a patch to import the image from the upstream > > Git repository, maybe you can use a tarball created from tagged > > commits on Github: > > https://github.com/sdsykes/fastimage/releases > > That would avoid the trouble of carrying around binary diffs. > Hmm... > Unfortunately, upstream forgot create release tag in github repo. > Github release tag: v1.6.0 > RubyGem release: v1.6.3 > I already sent request to upstream about missing fixtures. But, if we > have to avoid to use binary diff, I'll create package using github > sources with version number, e.g., 1.6.3~gitYYYYMMDD-1. That would probably be the way to go, then. In the mean time, can you open an issue upstream to tag 1.6.3 on the Git repo? Maybe it will be solved more quickly than the inclusion of the picture in the gem.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature