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

Bug#752339: Some questions about RFS: dbuskit/0.1.1-1 [ITP]



On 15-07-14 14:54, Yavor Doganov wrote:
> Paul Gevers wrote:
>> Before I upload this package to the new queue, could you please
>> comment on the lintian errors about missing source?
> 
> The reason for these is gnustep-make's incapable dist rule, combined
> with not so careful upstream.
> 
>> I am looking for a statement like: "I added lintian overrides...
> 
> Hmm, but I have not overridden them, I don't feel I should.  I have
> informed upstream and I hope it won't happen in subsequent releases.

Well, to document this fact is exactly why an override would be nice.
But I understand you position, I guess you just want to prevent it
happens again next time, right? But think of people other than you
working on the package (e.g. me or anybody in the future that needs to
NMU the package). I haven't checked, but ftp-masters use also several
lintian checks as auto-reject. So maybe this is even needed to pass the
NEW queue.

> I'm not cleaning them explicitly either as gnustep-make's distclean
> rule does that.  There's little I can do given that the object files
> are in the .orig tarball; adding a lintian override won't change that.

Well, the source has to be DFSG-free. How we guarantee that usually is
by building everything from source during the build. If you don't want
to build it, you have to remove them from source and repack (I had to do
that for some releases of one of my upstreams as well). It is an
annoyance, sure, but necessary if we uphold the social contract. So,
either remove the files from the source, or build during build.

> Yes and no.  They depend on a test framework that is not packaged for
> Debian, so they're unused for the debian package build.

Ack.

> As for the license, debian/copyright is correct.  It is true there are
> discrepancies, I'll ask upstream to rectify this.

Please add a comment field to the copyright file. Otherwise the
ftp-master is going to ask the same questions again (or going to reject
the package).

Also noting somewhere that this package is a requisite for agenda.app is
good, e.g. in the ITP.

Paul


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: