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

Bug#751009: marked as done (RFS: ppp-gatekeeper/0.1.0-201406111015-1 [ITP])

Your message dated Tue, 9 Sep 2014 13:44:13 -0300
with message-id <[🔎] CAP+dXJdaKV5xxnO+_fWgq5PjNuiYzR4oHeCx9zsst0kWcxV5mQ@mail.gmail.com>
and subject line Re: Bug#751009: RFS: ppp-gatekeeper/0.1.0-201406111015-1 [ITP]
has caused the Debian Bug report #751009,
regarding RFS: ppp-gatekeeper/0.1.0-201406111015-1 [ITP]
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
751009: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=751009
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: sponsorship-requests
Severity: wishlist

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ppp-gatekeeper"

Package name    : ppp-gatekeeper
Version         : 0.1.0-201406091140-1
Upstream Author : Nigel Kukard <nkukard@lbsd.net>
URL : http://gitlab.devlabs.linuxassist.net/ppp-gatekeeper/ppp-gatekeeper 
License         : GPL-2+
Section         : net

It builds this noarch package:

  ppp-gatekeeper - PPP Gatekeeper
To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: 

http://mentors.debian.net/package/ppp-gatekeeper


Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command:
dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/ppp-gatekeeper/ppp-gatekeeper_0.1.0-201406091140-1.dsc 


Changes since the last upload:

* Initial upload


Regards,
Nigel Kukard

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Hi Nigel,

Sorry for my delay.

2014-09-08 7:01 GMT-03:00 Nigel Kukard <nkukard@lbsd.net>:
>>> Hi there Eriberto,
>>> No problem at all, I really do appreciate your time :)


I am glad to help you.


> I'm looking at d-policy #3.4 & #5.6.13 but I can't find what the length
> limit is. I kept the entire line to under 80 to be sure.


Here is your answer:

http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/ppp-gatekeeper/ppp-gatekeeper_0.1.0-201406111015-1.dsc


> I have two questions to ask clarification on:
>
> 1. If there were 100 files, each file having a different date range in the
> copyright line, would I need to list each and every one?


No. A program is 'one' code only. Consider that you have pacman-cool.
See the files:

pacman-cool.c, by (John One in 2012, 2013 and 2014) and (Maria Eggs in
2013, under GPL-3+).
pacman-cool.h, by (John One in 2013) and (Maria Eggs in 2013, under GPL-3+).
pacman-cool.1, by (Maria Eggs in 2014, under GPL-3+).
pacman-cool-scores.c, by (Lion Fox in 2013 and 2014, under GPL-3+).

The AUTHORS file (or other file) lists the all names above. Then:

Files: *
Copyright: 2012-2014 John One <john@one.org>
           2013-2014 Lion Fox <fox@mailgh.com>
                     Maria Eggs <maria@eggs.com.it>
License: GPL-3.0+

You can see more details here: http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5/#copyright-field


> For instance, say a package is the combination of a few other projects, its
> quite possible that some may list 2014, some 2009-2014, some 2004-2005 for
> instance.


The same case, if I think that I understood your question.


> 2. My second question is if there are say 5 people listed in the files
> copyright line, how would these be properly listed? would the first one
> appear on the copyright line in d-control and the rest below it indented 1
> space from the left?


Ok. I think that I replied above. See an example here:

http://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs/main/s/sentinella/unstable_copyright


> As I may not be the only person that authored the files, I changed "by" to
> "contact", I hope this is acceptable.


No problem. I improved the indentation only.


>> 4. As curiosity, why you says 'Source:
>> https://gitlab.devlabs.linuxassist.net/ppp-gatekeeper/ppp-gatekeeper'
>> in d/copyright but uses
>> 'http://download.allworldit.org/ppp-gatekeeper' in d/watch?
>
>
> The first link is the revision control site used for the project, The
> copyright URL points to the revision control site as it is the most up to
> date.
>
> The package was downloaded from the second link you mentioned. While the
> first site offers limited downloading, it lacks hashes and also doesn't
> support signatures. On the second site the sources are hashed and signed. It
> also lists all versions nicely and in a nice order. This download link is
> also listed in the wiki on the project site.
>
> I can change the URL in the copyright file, I just thought it best to point
> to the revision control URL as this is most up to date.


I think that the best is use a URL only. The copyright file must to
say where you really downloaded the code. You can add a 'Comment'
field below the 'Source' to list the revision control site.


> I've been over all mails twice, and I am hoping very much that this time all
> is good.
>
> I've re-uploaded the latest revision.


Your package is very good and I uploaded it.

Thanks a lot for your work (as upstream and as packager).

Cheers,

Eriberto

--- End Message ---
Reply to: