Bug#715426: Version 0.10.1
On 12 December 2015 at 18:00, Rod Smith <rodsmith@rodsbooks.com> wrote:
> * Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>, who maintains Ubuntu's shim
> package, has stated that public keys are not subject to copyright
> (which I'd gathered from other sources, too), and has suggested
> omitting explicit mention of them from the debian/copyright file.
> I've followed this advice, which clears up the last of the lintian
> errors and warnings. If somebody who reviews the package objects,
> we can add back the information we had before and omit the
> remaining keys. Since the maintainer of Ubuntu's shim package
> has suggested this solution, though, I'd like to run with it.
Awesome, that makes sense to me! (and vorlon's usually pretty reliable :D)
> * I've tweaked a few files in the debian directory on my own git
> archive and in the tarball release to reflect my own PPA needs.
> The biggest of these is debian/changelog, but I've also made a
> couple of changes to debian/control. I figure these differences
> can be handled via diffs when creating the official Debian
> package. If that's a problem, then I'm sure we can work something
> out. If necessary, I'll do a 0.10.1.1 release with Debian packaging
> tweaks and we can base the first Debian release off of it.
This isn't really as important in the context of Debian, since we'll
supply a separate "debian/", but it's definitely nice to keep them in
parity, so I'll go do a re-sync and see where we're at!
> I think that's about it. Unless there are other outstanding issues. I'm
> ready to push this version for inclusion in Debian! Tianon, if you can
> advise me on the next step, I'd appreciate it. Thanks!
Sorry for being so badly delayed on this! Your patience is
appreciated. Always way too much going on at any given time... D:
♥,
- Tianon
4096R / B42F 6819 007F 00F8 8E36 4FD4 036A 9C25 BF35 7DD4
Reply to: