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

Bug#579509: ctpl version 0.3.2 available at m.d.n

On Saturday 22,January,2011 11:39 PM, Jonathan Michalon wrote:
> [...]
>> I can't sponsor your package (I've already uploaded 0.3.2 to Ubuntu though), but
>> I'd like to drop a few notes from what I've noticed while bringing ctpl up to
>> date in Ubuntu.
> This may sound as duplicate work, but as I'm quite new to packaging so this way
> I learn a lot more. I don't know however whether this will make conflicts at
> Ubuntu sync time… in case this package get uploaded to main Debian.

It shouldn't conflict. The Ubuntu packages have a version of a.b.c-XubuntuY,
where a.b.c-X is the Debian version it is based on. The ctpl package I have
uploaded has a version 0.3.2-0ubuntu1, which can be superseded by the Debian
version at any point in the future. If there is a need to preserve a delta
against your package, then we'll just merge it into the new version, yielding
something like 0.3.2-1ubuntu1.

> [...] 
>> 4. Why are you build-dep'ing on libglib2.0-doc? I'm not sure whether this is
>> really needed.
> This is needed so that gtk-doc can create links to glib's pages in the html
> documentation . As libctpl heavily uses glib types and facilities I thought
> that this will greatly improve the doc's usability.

Oh, I see, so the links aren't hardcoded in the generated docs? I thought they were.

>> 5. Drop the libctpl2 depends from ctpl in debian/control. dh_shlibdeps will pick
>> it up on its own, with a more accurate dependency.
> Okay, done.
>> 6. I'm not sure why libctpl-doc recommends libglib2.0-doc. Is that really necessary?
> This is related to 4). If we link to glib's doc, it's recommended (but not
> absolutely necessary) that libglib2.0-doc be installed.

Okay, understood.
>> Apart from that, I think the package looks fine :-)
> Thanks! I'm waiting for Squeeze's release and end of deep freeze to seek for a
> sponsor.

There's always Evgeni to poke. He's always on #geany on FreeNode. :-)

Kind regards,
Loong Jin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: