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

Bug#698557: RFS: noblenote/1.0.8-1 [ITP] -- a note taking program based on Qt



On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Christian Metscher <hakaishi@web.de> wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "noblenote"
>
>   Package name    : noblenote
>   Version         : 1.0.8-1
>   Upstream Author : Christian Metscher <hakaishi@web.de>
>   URL             : https://launchpad.net/~hakaishi/+archive/noblenote
>   License         : MIT
>   Section         : editors
>
> It builds those binary packages:
>
>     noblenote  - Qt program for taking notes

Hi,

I'm interested in sponsoring this package. Mostly, things look great.
Builds and runs fine. Lintian is happy with it except for one little
informational tag, that I dont consider a blocker:

I: noblenote: desktop-entry-lacks-keywords-entry
usr/share/applications/noblenote.desktop
N:
N:    This .desktop file does either not contain a "Keywords" entry or it does
N:    not contain any keywords not already present in the "Name" or
N:    "GenericName" entries.
N:
N:    .desktop files are organized in key/value pairs (similar to .ini files).
N:    "Keywords" is the name of the entry/key in the .desktop file containing
N:    keywords relevant for this .desktop file.
N:
N:    The desktop-file-validate tool in the desktop-file-utils package is
N:    useful for checking the syntax of desktop entries.
N:
N:    Refer to
N:    http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ar01s05.html,
N:    http://bugs.debian.org/693918, and
N:    https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeGoals/DesktopFileKeywords for details.
N:
N:    Severity: wishlist, Certainty: certain
N:
N:    Check: menu-format, Type: binary
N:


Generally, I like to sponsor packages that use the machine readable
copyright format as documented here:

http://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/

But again, that's not a blocker.

The one real problem I see is that the source and licensing of the
icons is unclear to me. Some of them look like they are from GNOME and
some maybe from Oxygen? That's fine, but their license and copyright
holders need to be documented.

Thanks,

-- Andrew Starr-Bochicchio

   Ubuntu Developer <https://launchpad.net/~andrewsomething>
   Debian Developer <http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=asb>
   PGP/GPG Key ID: D53FDCB1


Reply to: