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

Re: Sponsor upload needed for updated packages: python-pynlpl, libticcutils, libfolia, uctodata, ucto



On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 02:53:23PM +0200, Maarten van Gompel wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> With the coming debian freeze deadline in November, I updated some of our
> packages to their latest upstream releases and am looking again for a sponsor
> to upload them. It concerns the following packages:

Note that the freeze that will happen on the 5th of November is a
transition request deadline, you simply can't do library transitions
after that date; the actual freeze where no updates to testing can
happen will be 2017-Feb-05 (with various other softer freezes before);
see https://release.debian.org/ (section "Key release dates").

btw, I'd personally be happier with just package names, if they are
already in the archive I can just debcheckout(1) them, if they are ITPs
I still already know where to look for them; furthermore git:// is a so
bad protocol, other than being read-only whilst I may be interested in
pushing too (but for this I have rules in my ~/.gitconfig to translate
most common alioth's addresses to git+ssh:// URIs).

> * git://anonscm.debian.org/debian-science/packages/python-pynlpl.git

* d/control:
  + "Testsuite: autopkgtest" is not needed: dpkg-source already adds it
    to the .dsc when it detects a d/tests/control file
  + trailing whitespaces at line 33 and 50
  + build-deps not really sorted (see wrap-and-sort(1) or
    `cme fix-dpkg-control` (or somesuch, I don't use cme myself))
  + I: python-pynlpl source: duplicate-short-description python-pynlpl python3-pynlpl
  + description-synopsis-might-not-be-phrased-properly
* d/copyright:
  + the order is wrong, and also lintian complains about this with
    unused-file-paragraph-in-dep5-copyright
  + spelling-error-in-copyright Containts Contains
* d/python3-pynlpl.manpages:
  + why not just using a wildcard with 'debian/manpages/*' insted of
    linsting everything?  (just a question, I'm fine with it as it is)
  + I: python3-pynlpl: spelling-error-in-manpage usr/share/man/man1/pynlpl-computepmi.1.gz occuring occurring
* what about bumping the compat level to 10?  (you'd gain automatic
  parallel building)
* d/python-pynlpl.lintian-overrides + "python3-pynlpl: library-package-name-for-application"
  + IMHO the best solution for this would be to move the binaries and
    the manpages to a 'pynlpl' binary package in Section:science, and
    keeep the python libraries in Section:python (where they should be);
    maybe in the future though.

> * git://anonscm.debian.org/debian-science/packages/libticcutils.git

why this repository name doesn't match the source package name?!?

* d/changelog:
  + trailing whitespaces at line 2
  + you didn't document a bunch of changes, please be comprehensive in
    the changelog
* d/control:
  + please use https in Vcs-Git, and the cgit frontend in Vcs-Browser;
    bonus point for using https with /git/ for both (i.e. same address
    in both fields)
  + the name of the -dev package contains the libary SONAME (the version
    number, I mean).  That's usually a bad idea, possibly consider
    renaming it to remove the number one day in the future.
* d/copyright:
  + same ordening problem
  + GPL-3+ is duplicate, that needs a separated standalone license
    paragraph
  + now I notice it's not following the DEP-5 at all.  It's very near
    though, can you finish the "rewrite"?
* d/libticcutils1-dev.install
  + this binary doesn't exist, please delete the file
* d/libticcutils1.install
  + ditto
* d/*
  + i don't get what that commit in the first line of nearly all files
    is doing there
* d/rules
  + cdbs :(
    this seems to be a pretty standard package, I'd be very happy to see
    it using dh (maybe with compat level 10, which would do autoreconf
    without specifying anything else (but I'm fine with it as it is now
    if maybe the other maintainer prefers it that way).

> * git://anonscm.debian.org/debian-science/packages/libfolia.git

edbe682f91673aa6f6cf992fec3b6b80cb0e52ed "debian/changelog: syntax fix"
don't you use dch(1) for editing the changelog?

* d/rules:
  + this one's cdbs too.  Anyway, if you bump compat level to >= 9 (i.e.
    10?) you shouldn't need that DEB_CONFIGURE_EXTRA_FLAG thing anymore.
  + and why not converting to dh directly at that point? :P
* d/control:
  + that's full of trailing whitespaces :(  (wrap-and-sort(1) removes
    them btw)
  + the -dev package could be M-A:same
  + duplicate-short-description libfolia-dev libfolia4
* d/copyright:
  + wrong order of paragraph
  + Author is not a recognized field name, what you could use is
    "Comment" though.
  + copyright-refers-to-symlink-license

> * git://anonscm.debian.org/debian-science/packages/uctodata.git

* d/changelog:
  + missing changes….
* d/control:
  + wrap-and-sort please?
  + https in Vcs-* please

erm, and after this I realized Vcs-Git of what's in the archive is wrong
as it points to another package repo....
restarting over...

* you didn't even fix the RC bug affecting the pacakge, srly?
* d/rules:
  + but do you actually prefer cdbs over dh?
* d/control:
  + please fix Vcs-Git
  + trailing whitespaces all over
  + the binary could be M-A:foreign
* d/uctodata.lintian-overrides
  + please remove this
* d/copyright:
  + same stuff as the above package

> * git://anonscm.debian.org/debian-science/packages/ucto.git

oh, here is the package from above...

* d/changelog:
  + missing changes….
* d/control:
  + wrap-and-sort please?
  + https in Vcs-* please
  + the -dev could be m-a:same
* d/copyright:
  + ditto

> All have been tested and verified to work, changes to the debian packages are minimal.

As I said in the other email, I'm all open to review huge changes, I
don't look after the "minimal changes", and instead I am more interested
in keeping packages of as much high quality as possibly.

As you can guess the stuff above are of several degree of importance;
e.g. I surely wouldn't refuse to sponsor a package for unordered
build-deps or trailing whitespaces, but I see some things as important
enough for them to be fixed (and while fixing them, why not sorting deps
and removing trailing whitespaces...).

If you see some points as silly or too hard (but really nothing of the
above are too hard), please feel free to skip them and point it out.

-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: