Hello Samuel,
> > Upstream was kind enough to push another release 1.6.8 so I wasn't sure > if I had to keep version 1.6.7 in the changelog file. > > I finally decided to update the above fields for version 1.6.8, but I'm > not sure so tell me if I was wrong. > > You did the right thing, we only need to keep the changelog entry if > an upload was made. Some people like to keep the release field of the > changelog as "UNRELEASED" until right before the upload to denote > that, while I rather check the tag to see if there was an upload as > changing to UNRELEASED->unstable would require an extra commit just > for that. > I understand, I'll keep that in mind for the next time. > > > I can see another lintian warning "changelog-should-not-mention-nmu", > should I remove the Uploaders line in d/control ? > > I see that you solved that by changing your name in d/changelog but I > do believe you want to change the entry in d/control instead. Just > consider that you can chose how your name/email is written and > d/control, you also control how it gets automatically written to > d/changelog[0] and you need to make those two matches because > otherwise our tooling will not recognize the upload as being made from > either the maintainer or the uploader (in our case it would need to be > marked as team upload). Now, with this in mind, consider which is the > way you want to have that written and put your tooling[0] and > d/control in sync and you will never again have this issue. The > developers reference has some good explanations about NMU and Team > Uploads in case you're not aware of it yet[1]. > I followed your recommendations and modified the control file. It's cleaner that way. (Sorry for the last two commits, it's ugly, I should have been careful and pushed this in one go) In fact, since several people have been involved in maintaining this package (including those helping me), I wonder if my name is really legitimate in the "Uploaders" field of the d/control file. > > I also added a quick test (brutespray -h) > > That's a nice addition, I'd like to ask you to add the restriction > "superficial" to it, every test which uses only "-h" should have this > restriction, and if you find one without it, feel free to change it. > The "skippable" restriction can be removed in favor of "superficial". > For more info, you can refer to the docs at [2]. > Ok thanks, it's done. I will take time to think about doing a more serious test for the next release. This one is not really testing much, actually. > > The rest of the package is all fine, so as soon as you update the test > (and change your name in d/control, if you decide to follow that way) > I will do the upload. > > Thanks for your work :) > Thank you for your patience and your precious help Samuel.
