Hi Arno, many thanks for you report. I will update my packaging for theses cosmetics changes as you said !
Regards, Nicolas 2011/7/21 Arno Töll <[email protected]> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi Nicolas, > > IANADD (twb told me, I shall be lazy!), here are some comments on your > package: > > On 21.07.2011 09:13, Nicolas wrote: > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "phing". > > * Please extend description of the -doc package. Its a bit too short. > You don't need to be too verbose, but please expand it by a few words. > For example you could tell what exactly the package contains and what > its purpose is. Compare with other -doc packages in Debian to get an idea > > * Your copyright looks pretty good, however "Copyright: 2001,2002 > THYRELL" is probably a bit to few of information. Maybe add a contact > address, I noticed in the code is listed one. Same for "2003, > seasonfive". Yes, this is pure pedantry - feel free to ignore this. > > * There is a new upstream release. Please consider packaging it. > Besides, the checksums of your orig.tar.gz don't not match with > upstream's package, being it the full package or the PEAR one. Please > don't touch it. > > $ sha1sum phing-2.4.5.tgz.1 > bf4c5e709c9141555c299e02aab8ac80cddd2cf7 phing-2.4.5.tgz.1 (this is PEAR) > $ sha1sum phing-2.4.5.tgz > f3e2eb295317b79a9e4223c193430a2896883967 phing-2.4.5.tgz > $ sha1sum phing_2.4.5.orig.tar.gz > 367c6a92bee3d3c73c6b36c9afa35a122c1eb11c phing_2.4.5.orig.tar.gz > > * What's /usr/share/php/phing/etc for? Those files don't look like > something which should be put in a etc-directory. I'm fine if you keep > it that way in /usr/share/php/phing/etc, I'm just trying to find out, > whether those files are meant to be touched at all. If so, they > shouldn't reside in /usr. > > * In debian/rules, please remove unneeded comments dh-make produced. > > * Please generate your manpage during build. It seems to me, you ship it > pre-compiled from the SGML man page you wrote. > > * Similar case for the API docs you package straight from the tarball. > The DFSG mandate that a software package is available from source and > its processing must be self-containing (e.g. compare with the "preferred > form for modification" from the GPL license). For the generated API docs > this means, there must be a way to regenerate those docs by means the > main archive provides. You don't necessarily need to do this when > producing the binary package, but please add at least a README.source > file, where you document how to regenerate those API docs, upstream > ships, if desired. > > * Your upstream tarball contains regression tests. Consider running them > during build. > > Good work. Those are almost all cosmetic changes. > > > - -- > with kind regards, > Arno Töll > IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC > GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOKFdFAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtNsoQAMUK3PphZGXhVNczYPMDMffG > DGlZdGJWkfpowsir6mVZiLMBVMxUsFTmgGuBZtWs2C90bPugPadLXLccs6AjT44f > /8Y8nIqDvT2kCwW2O/Izh7QxwnnxNn6X1ryFQlphsJd7uPe6rGX4hHAs8xxEOFCL > 06iJCIipq1yH2h7LhoaryFUh5Xng1fTSyzK7R8axEESPW7OUSiS94yrIEQA6d/Ki > 4NzYkZjgLiFOqlX5rqa/k6tFs2qwoLVePc1bcwmbJB0ErC32sgnMC7u/gIEZn/g1 > t8A11dw4BHwOWwHX8IqkjuIKC7IibSvVuPIIzg+GYRJcoXrgY/Vww6xwIFaK3wPS > frhgxRSh8QSFNnHLixEIuZ1YyvunDpMhN6o33oPLaMWvWsoQAvNH2vHUEXIQIxTZ > kzddqn0Y5XuuwjpXqIMJFytzL6nYMRSkJyRZrb5n1csgyNK99gi/Gczsm099YTAD > ihHXtv9Cwgn3JYXfNdtchkJaLhRuh7ExdzmbR7/VsJ2/5HEpjVtuZK3Fpc8psckP > UNRQDbFRUYNWhSuC5brnte++HbV+ZTInkOLi9Jb5lRr5/fdxVigfEK4ph1xV6rh4 > me5/OYg6LxgXxlePYfsYXll0KaHTMWEuahzf5k1DQMnH3GFk6NSbpq2hYBt6DQHY > P39Ag9vBdig83Y4DSoh+ > =KAoz > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [email protected] > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected] > >
