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

Re: [review] ledger-udev



This e-mail regards the packaging of the ledger udev rules at
https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-security-team/ledger-udev

I'm adding debian-security-tools@lists.debian.org to CC since I don't
think I can help any more and I guess Stéphane will need a sponsor
soon :) .


Hi Stéphane,

On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 14:06:13 +0100
Stéphane Neveu <stefneveu@gmail.com> wrote:

> I see no more warning running lintian -i --pedantic, I also added the
> file ledger-udev.metadata.xml for appstream/modalias

Great!

> Do I still need to keep this upstream/latest branch ? I'm asking as
> the package is native now.

No, for a native package that branch makes no sense and should be
removed.

Package looks fine now to me from a technical perspective. Raphaël has
already updated the Maintainer and Vcs-* control fields :) . Note
that I have never worked on a native package myself, so I might have
missed something.


A few more things I noticed / I'm unsure about:

* The bottom part of the BSD-2-clause license you're using doesn't seem
  to fit too well: "THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND
  CONTRIBUTORS …".  It's just you I guess, no regents.

* I would drop the word "simply" from the description (both in your
  man-page and the xml file).  Whether or not adding the udev rules is
  simple or not is irrelevant for the users :) .

* postinst: I'm wondering if the `udevadm` commands are really
  necessary.  My feeling is that since the udev file is installed by
  dh_installudev and debhelper doesn't insert those rules, they might
  not be required.  Maybe someone here has advise (but be sure to check
  before dropping the commands; this is really just a feeling).


Regards
Lukas



Reply to: