On Fri, 7 Jul 2017 10:04:49 +0000 (UTC) Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofb...@debian.org> wrote: > > > >I'm not sure what you mean. > >These are dev dependencies, they are used by big-integer developers to > >perform various development tasks, but they are not required to simply > >use the library so there is no point in packaging them in Debian. > >And they are *not* embedded in the package, they only appear in > >package.json. > > > this makes sense, thanks. > So the review goes to the next step. > 1) licenses are missing (even if not used in the binary package, the copyright > should list all the licenses in the source code). > 2) please use the same copyright as upstream for Debian packaging, this will > make > patch upstreaming possible without having to explicitly relicense them
ping G. > > G. > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
