Hi Marcelo, I'm a new/inexperienced contributor myself, but I have some suggestions that could hopefully be useful to you.
> I have split the package and the debianization in different > repositories. It is fairly common to keep the packaging on a separate branch, if your actual preference is to maintain it in the same repo. The git-buildpackage tool has good support for that. I'd suggest moving/mirroring the packaging repo to salsa.debian.org. There were some relevant guidelines sent out on debian-devel-announce just yesterday [1], including that one. Then you could also utilize salsa-ci [2]. > I believe all packaging problems are fixed now. Please let me know any > further improvements I can do to make it suitable for Debian. - debian/patches is not needed if there are no patches. - debian/README.Debian also seems unnecessary, considering its current content is just the package's synopsis. - debian/copyright lists GPL-3 for *, but debian/* is actually (presumably unintentionally) LGPL-3 according to the LICENSE file in your new repo. [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2020/04/msg00009.html [2] https://salsa.debian.org/salsa-ci-team/pipeline#debian-pipeline-for-developers Regards, Robin
