I am not a DD, but let me put some of my input on these.
On 2026-05-16 11:40, Mateusz Łukasik wrote:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1128880 (RFS: vimb)
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1128878 (RFS: evilwm)
I would appreciate any support in reviewing and sponsoring these uploads.
issues in both packages
===================
d/control: Wrong fields. Vcs-Browser needs to be a **web page** for the
Git repo, not the .git extension. This is defined in policy
vimb
====
This was reviewed by a non-DD who put comments on your package that use
a latest Lintian for checks.
The details from Nicolas Schodet on May 16 (today) are:
- W: vimb: appstream-metadata-validation-failed Problems reported by
"appstreamcli validate-tree"
Your appstream data does not validate. This should be fixed.
- I: vimb source: vcs-field-not-canonical Browser
https://salsa.debian.org/mati75/vimb.git
https://salsa.debian.org/mati75/vimb
As stated above, wrong item to put in the field. Use the non-.git URL
for Vcs-Browser field.
evilwm
======
Lintian throws this:
- I: evilwm source: vcs-field-not-canonical Browser
https://salsa.debian.org/mati75/evilwm.git
https://salsa.debian.org/mati75/evilwm
Same as the other package. This is fixable (and I recommend fixing this
BEFORE this gets sponsored).
---
Both packages seem to build in `sid` chroots (I did not test
cross-architecture, only what i have on my laptop which is amd64 currently).
Once you fix the information above (though the Info-level issues are not
necessarily blockers, the Warning level one could be), I'm sure there'll
be more of a chance that someone'll be willing to sponsor your stuff.
(I can't, because I'm not a DD, but I can still help review a little and
give suggestions.)
Thomas
