Hello, Thanks a lot for your help.
> I've checked this and noticed you did some changes in a new changelog > entry. This would lead to the consequence that the ITP bug you try to > close in 0.1-1 will not be closed because only the last changelog > paragraph is regarded. I'd also suggest to simply drop the whole 0.1-2 > paragraph because osmctools 0.1-1 never has hit the Debian mirror (or > did I missed anything). Please just update the time stamp of 0.1-1. I understand, it's corrected. > I would like to have a record for the sponsored packages to have some > sign that the SoB effort is useful. It's done. > In principle this is OK but we somehow need some versioning and if > anyhow possible a watch file to spot new versions. This might be hard > in this case (I have not checked upstream). Perhaps it might even be > possible to convince upstream to create some common versioned tarball? > > In any case you need to create a get-orig-source target in debian/rules > that would enable anybody to reproduce the source tarball. I have some troubles with watch file and gitorious. I asked to upstream dev to create tag (https://gitorious.org/osm-c-tools/osmctools/trees/0.1), but it's doesn't work. I have to dig on this point. > BTW, please remove the dh-make boilerplate form the debian/rules file > which claims that it is a "Sample debian/rules that uses debhelper." You > rules file is no example but rather a rules file creating a specific > package. The whole comment is just not true. It's done. Best regards. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caogtle+hbbaq5et+t5taxzhvzw5tggskus4j7dgzb4qhw5f...@mail.gmail.com
