Hello Sergio,
Am Thu, 12 Jul 2018 21:11:50 -0400 schrieb Sergio Durigan Junior <sergi...@debian.org>: > [..] > Hm, it seems you removed an important line, [..] stumbling upon my own feet :( > 1) Since this is the first release of the package, a d/changelog with an > entry like: > [..] > would have been enough. Good to know - thank you. > 2) A word about git tags. I noticed you only have the "debian/1.0.0-1" > tag, but no "upstream/1.0.0" tag in your git repo. git-buildpackage > should have created that for you; it's worth checking to see if you > didn't forget to push. gbp ist still quite new to me ... I tagged the upstream release now. > Also, we usually don't create the "debian/xyz" tags until the package > has been uploaded and accepted into the archives. Good to know! > Hm, alright. The "aggregate-results.sh" may be useful to some users; it > provides a way to display the results in a nicer way, right? Indeed, the code looks like that. But I also expected it to adjust its exit code in case of errors. Thus it feels like a tool just for humans and not for testing. We will see, how upstream responds ... > Maybe you could install it under /usr/share/doc/sharness/contrib/, since it's > not an example script, but doesn't seem *that* important to justify polluting > the PATH. What do you think? That sounds good. I suggested this location in the discussion with upstream: https://github.com/chriscool/sharness/issues/78#issuecomment-404706089 Now I install this file via dh_install in the above location. But dh_install seems to remove the executable flag from the file (as the target path indicates a documentation file, I guess). Do you think, this is acceptable? Or would an "override_dh_auto_install" target be justified for a chown operation? I uploaded another source package for another round ... Thank you! Cheers, Lars
