Bug#301510: Processed: retitle 301510 ITP: tinyerp -- ERP and CRM for small to medium businesses
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Damien
damien clochard wrote:
| Le Mercredi 30 Mars 2005 09:55, vous avez écrit :
|
|>It would be better to judge if I would have access to the source
|>packages (*.tar.gz, *.dsc and *.diff.gz).
|>
|
| well everything is on the server ....
|
|
http://debian.dalibo.org/dists/sarge/main/binary-all/tinyerp-client_2.0.orig.tar.gz
|
http://debian.dalibo.org/dists/sarge/main/binary-all/tinyerp-client_2.0-6.dsc
|
http://debian.dalibo.org/dists/sarge/main/binary-all/tinyerp-client_2.0-6.diff.gz
|
http://debian.dalibo.org/dists/sarge/main/binary-all/tinyerp-server_2.0.orig.tar.gz
|
http://debian.dalibo.org/dists/sarge/main/binary-all/tinyerp-server_2.0-3.dsc
|
http://debian.dalibo.org/dists/sarge/main/binary-all/tinyerp-server_2.0-3.diff.gz
Ok, I'll take a look at them earliest tomorrow afternoon (I'm in the
middle of my final examinations).
|>| * the '#!/usr/bin/python' is omitted in many .py files
|>
|>I think this is intentional: they are only used for importing them.
|>
|
|
| yes i did that just to squash a few lintian warnings.
| Furthermore it seems that lintian doesn't recognize
'#!/usr/bin/python2.3' as
| a correct header and throws the 'python-script-but-no-python-dep'
error tag.
Most of this is solved by using dh_python (and {python:Depends}).
|>What did you do with pydot (seperate license)?
|
|
| That's a good question :))
| It seems to me that this License is compatible with the GPL , but i'm
not an
| expert...
Well, if it is GPL compatible, it still has to be mentioned separately
in the copyright file...
| More generally we could have a very modular approach for
tinyerp-server and
| build distinct packages for each add-on (account, base, crm, marketing,
| etc...)
| By the way i think we'll have to do so for the i18n files
I think we have to contact upstream to work this out, but I still have
to investigate how i18n is handled exactly at the moment.
|>I thought more of actual co-maintainership [1] for both of the packages.
|>This is certainly preferable if you are not an official Debian Developer
|>(yet?) ... then you don't have to search for a sponsor :-)
|
|
| Sounds good to me :)
| I've already made several packages but never really tried to make them
| official ... I'm using debian for a longtime and now i want to get more
| involved in the community. So i'd be happy if you 're ok to be my
sponsor :)
| By the way, there's no problem with me if you want to be the 'primary
| maintainer'
Well, yes it is my intention to be your sponsor then (at least for
tinyerp, maybe also other packages). Being the 'primary maintainer'
isn't important IMO, maybe we could mention a mailinglist instead, we'll
see.
Cheers
Luk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFCSqMa5UTeB5t8Mo0RAqHrAKCcWzL8Ewpgip4/vRUfqw6Vo1WWQQCfSzBH
is1yalIbIBPTjlgZuAurIFM=
=2hQv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: