Hey Ben, thanks for your help! On 14/09/2016 03:17, Ben Finney wrote: > * When removing code, just remove it. You are tracking the work in a > VCS, there is generally no reason to commit changes that comments out > lines of code. > > So, in ‘debian/patches/’, the > ‘0001-Remove-check-for-python-version.patch’ and > ‘0003-Patch-sphinx-config-to-avoid-network-access-and-add-.patch’ > changes (actually, the Git commits you used to generate those files) > should not comment any code lines but instead remove those lines. Ack. > * Wow, hard-coding a man page in a Python string literal is a fragile > way to store the document. > > Have you discussed with upstream the feasibility of moving those to > their own first-class source documents, and reading from there at run > time? Python ‘pkg_resources’ has functionality to locate and read a > file installed as part of the package. I agree, in fact I thought the same thing. I have not discussed it with upstream, but I noticed that they were separate in a (much) earlier release, so there seems to be some deliberation. I think the reason is the desire to automatically insert the current version number and also the fact that it seems to be intended solely for the --help option of the script itself, not as a true man page. Obviously I would like to have this changed, but for now I was just trying to resolve all problems with the packaging as is. > * In ‘debian/copyright’, please don't obfuscate the email addresses of > copyright holders. It's a needless barrier to getting useable contact > information for legal purposes. Ack. > * Is there a good reason to omit the “Upstream-Maintainer” field in the > header of the ‘debian-copyright’ file? There seems to be an obvious > single maintainer contact for this code base. No reason; added. > * The ‘cf/etc/udunits/’ tree looks like a bundled third-party work. Per > Debian Policy §4.13, should this work not be packaged separately and > listed as a dependency? It is a slightly customized extract from a third-party work that is a dependency already. However, I managed to implement the changes in runtime code, alleviating the need for the files, so now they are removed. > * Can you include a ‘debian/README.source’ explaining how you collated > the various parts and changes you've made from the upstream source? > > In particular, the procedure for making ‘debian/*.1’ and > ‘debian/test_file.nc’ should be described, along with rationales that > can be later re-visited if upstream policies change. Done.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature