Thanks for the quick reply,

On 21.05.2020 01:30, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
Hi Sławomir,

Thank you for your interest and initiative!

Sławomir Wójcik <> writes:

One issue is that I've created the repo from scratch because git repo is not
reachable, existing package have quite ancient upstream version and it's
files(especially rules is obviously not using dh-elpa) are mostly outdated.

I can try to use gbp-import-dsc and recreate a new repo if it's really
or required but I don't see much value in it because:

The issue isn't the "repo" so much as continuity with the existing
source package.  Two people's occasional contributions over three years
are valuable, and erasing them from Debian history would be unjust.
I have imported from dsc by gbp-import-dsc in a new fresh repo, so I should be able to merge my changes(basically replacing all debian/* files)
-if we want to adhere to EmacsenTeam Addons packaging policy
( and I think we should for better
collaboration and consistency then the package name should be changed to
elpa-scala-mode and existing
should be marked as transitional dummy package installing new one, right?

The binary package name should be elpa-scala-mode, but the source
package should remain scala-mode-el.
Actually upstream project name is emacs-scala-mode( <>) rather than scala-mode-el, but I guess binary package name is more important for debian users and if source package name will stay the same it won't be such a big deal, right?
-upstream version in existing package and most of debian files are very old
or outdated

Yup, that's part of the work of adopting a package that needs work ;-)

Please, let me know what should be done. As I pointed out here:
it would be the best if someone from Debian Emacsen Packaging Team will work
with me on this and other packages but maybe someone else will be
interested to
give his/her opinion.

If you proceed with this ITP I'd like to work with you and/or comaintain
it, because it's a blocker for my smartparens ITP.
That would be great.

On 21.05.2020 01:49, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
P.S.  Are you using the following as the new upstream source?:

I've received confirmation this is the one smartparens requires.


Reply via email to