Hi Laszlo, thank you for your review. I just reworked most of your suggestions into the package. On 03/15/2015 10:25 AM, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > - extra line at the end of copyright, Done > - also an extra line at the end of rules, Done > - rules file format may be noted on the second line with '# -*- makefile -*-', I left this still out, because I think it should be clear that it is a Makefile (especially with #!/usr/bin/make at the top). > - you may add DH_VERBOSE option (uncommented ATM) to rules, Done > - it's a small package and probably not worth it, but you may add > '--parallel' to 'dh $@' in rules, Done > - in control, I'd not start the long description with the package name > as it's already known, I also left the long description as it is. I checked several other packages, and starting it with the package name seems to be the normal case? > - I don't see why you install README, the description part is already > in control, plus the download, build and install part is not relevant > for the users (they can do and maybe already did it with apt-get > install), You're right, the README doesn't make much sense now. I've removed it from the package. > - patches needs to be updated with newer releases, that's why I prefer > removing extra files in rules and no patching / while nothing wrong > with your way, I didn't think of it at first, but I also agree that it's better to remove them in rules than to keep updating patches. > - the use of GPL 2.0 (dot+zero) in copyright, as it's noted 2 or 3 > everywhere including the second line of the package COPYING file, in > its Wiki[1] or on the GNU license page[2]; only the filenames may > contain that ending. Done I also now let the bash-completion script be installed by debhelper instead of the upstream Makefile. > If you change any of these, I can wait or if you want, upload it as is. Can you please redownload it again (same place), review and then upload it? Thank you! Regards, Reiner
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature