On 03/12/2016 01:33, Jérémy Lal wrote:
> 2016-12-03 1:02 GMT+01:00 Paolo Greppi <paolo.gre...@libpf.com>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I packaged node-loose-envify as per this ITP:
>> https://bugs.debian.org/846206, this is the repo:
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-javascript/node-loose-envify.git
>>
>> Two notes
>> - regarding the source-is-missing error mentioned here
>> https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-javascript-devel/2016-November/015929.html,
>> I choose to delete the file with a patch
> 
> I'm not sure it does the trick.
> A better IMO approach is to use Files-Exclude in debian/copyright, and
> make a proper debian/watch. Then uscan will automatically dfsg-repack
> the orig tarball. See how some other dfsg/ds packages do that.

It does the trick because the lintian error is gone.

I'd rather avoid dfsg rightnow because :
- the specific file is part of the javascript corpus the test suite runs
on (which we can't run at the moment anyway since it requires browserify)
- I don't think that makes the package "non-DFSG clean" as a whole
- sheer ignorance: the dfsg_clean workflow being new for me

> 
>> - I could not get rid of the binary-without-manpage lintian warning, as
>> the supplied CLI does not support --help I could not use help2man ...
> 
> Then you need to build a manpage...
> A very easy way to do so is with marked-man (convert .md to .1).
> Leave the envify.md file in debian/ dir and build the .1 during build.

Nice tool, I have created a basic manpage.

> Side note:
> override_dh_fixperms:
>   dh_fixperms -X debian/node-loose-envify/usr/lib/nodejs/loose-envify/cli.js
> 
> isn't right because it makes the build non-reproducible, see
> https://bugs.debian.org/845745
> about why.

Done

> Also the description isn't really clear. Maybe a short sentence about
> what it's about in a more general way. Is it useful for some build tool ?

I gave it a try, let me know if it makes more sense.

It's difficult for me to imagine the use cases of some of the modules we
are packaging. This one I'm trying to get in because it's a dependency
of node-invariant - and all this is to get node-yarnpkg into Stretch as
a new package.

I wonder if we can do it < 2017-01-05 ?

There are about 6 dependencies left to go plus babel + gulp as build
deps. The latter is the same short-term focus as
https://www.generosity.com/community-fundraising/debian-browserify-2 so
yes maybe it can be done !

> 
> Jérémy.
> 
> 


-- 
Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list
Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel

Reply via email to