Hi Pino, thanks for the additional review.
Le 13/01/2019 à 23:45, Pino Toscano a écrit : > In data domenica 13 gennaio 2019 21:24:33 CET, Aurélien COUDERC ha scritto: >> I’ve updated to the latest upstream version and made various cleanups so it >> should be in a releasable state now. >> I’ve become a DD in the meantime so I can do the upload myself. Still I’d >> appreciate if you could give the repo a look and send me a quick ack. > > I just committed the removal of two empty files, debian/patches/series, > and debian/TODO.Debian (no point having them empty). Thanks. > Few of notes from my side: > > - using the debian-qt-kde.mk makefile was generally considered > "reserved" only for what in the past were "kde" packages, now > kf5/plasma/applications; for extragear stuff, just using plain dh with > the kf5 addon should be fine (remember to uncomment the as-needed > linking) Done. As to why these 2 changes would be linked remains mysterious to me. I’m not well versed in library linking but docs / explanation welcome if the reason is reasonably understandable. > - I see elisa has no command line options, and the debian/elisa.1 man > page is just a stub generated by help2man; IMHO it is not useful, as > it does not provide anything more than what --help says, and so I'd > remove it; my position on man pages is that, if they are really > needed/requested, then they should be requested upstream, so they can > be maintained, translated, and shipped directly by packaging elisa; > we had too many cases of local Debian man pages that were not updated > after the initial commit, rotting for years... Done. I also silenced lintian if that’s ok. > - elisa seems heavily based on QML, although there are no runtime > dependencies on QML modules Ah yes. :( Fixed. > - all the build dependencies are unversioned, even if the upstream > requirements are sort of recent versions of ECM/Qt5/KF5; considering > that from time to time there are people that try to backport packages > in testing/unstable to stable for their own use, usually setting the > right versions (if required) helps not wasting their time; personally, > I do not set a minimum version of a build requirement if stable fulfils > it already Done. I hadn’t considered backporting. > - autopkgtest is meant to test packages as available in the archive, > not to be a generic CI for running the test suite on a new package > build; the current 'testsuite' autopkgtest does not test the in-archive > package, and as such it is not a valid autopkgtest test (and it can > even produce wrong results) Right, I removed this. I also bumped debhelper-compat to 12. If nothing more pops up I’ll push it through NEW. Cheers, -- Coucouf -- https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
