Thank you again for your replies, Gianfranco, >>I would like to get both my new package (python3-tldp) and a revised >>ldp-docbook-stylesheets on the conveyor belt into the Debian >>universe. > >ok > >>After trying to understand the flow of work and the current status >>with these two packages, I have come up with the following plan. >> >>For python-tldp (source) which creates python3-tldp (binary): > > >sounds good. >(maybe you can call the source python3-tldp or tldp)
Rename the upstream or change the name of the source package in debian/control to say 'tldp'? Latter, sure, no problem. It is now done. >> 1. I file an ITP for python3-tldp (#822181) [0]. >> 2. I follow the process and, eventually, file an RFS. >correct >> -2. If somebody can tell me that I did an acceptable job on >> creating the package for python3-tldp, I plan .... > >sure, the RFS is here for that reason >> -1. Since all of the former contributors of the DSSSL and XSL are >> gone, and the only sources I can find are tarballs (including >> the one in the Debian project). >> >> 0. I propose to declare ldp-docbook-stylesheets dead, and ... >> >> 1. Create a native package of ldp-docbook-stylesheets hosted >> by TLDP. > >seems a good solution to me > >> 2. Provide a fully-Debianized native source of the >> ldp-docbook-stylesheets (with required bugfixes and required >> new stylesheets to support Docbook 5.x). > >wonderful! >> W: python3-tldp source: newer-standards-version 3.9.8 (current is 3.9.6) > >lintian is broken (fixed in git, but not yet uploaded in Debian) >3.9.8 is good OK. I will just leave the package building with that particular lintian warning. >> W: python3-tldp source: debian-watch-file-in-native-package >>The second one is a bit confusing to me, most likely because I do >>not understand how the watch file is used. Could somebody explain >>why lintian does not like my watch file? > > >the "native" packages are managed and maintained inside Debian >(because they are Debian specific tools) > >uscan (the tool that uses watch file), parses that file to find >new upstream releases. I have just read up on uscan. >For Debian specific packages this sounds... useless :) > >so, instead of calling your tool >1.0 > >you have to call it >"1.0-1" >and put 1.0 (quilt) in debian/source/format. If I change debian/source/format to anything besides '3.0 (native)', my package no longer builds from the working directory. Here's what works (right now): https://github.com/martin-a-brown/python-tldp/ cd python-tldp debuild -us -uc Can you help me replace the command 'debuild -us -uc' with another that I can use after setting debian/source/format to '3.0 (quilt)'? (Oh, and I'm happy to make any other changes necessary....) And, I certainly understand the reasoning for the watch file and the separate responsibilities of the version and release values. I just don't know how to handle that from a single source tree, it seems. >This way the watch file will let uscan download a new upstream release, >and help you in packaging it. >>I'd gladly take direction for how to proceed and any pointers on any >>of my thoughts. Hopefully, I have not gotten the process too wrong. > >I would say you got it too right :) >you really did a good job here, I'm waiting for your package :) Thank you! -Martin -- Martin A. Brown http://linux-ip.net/
