Re: RFS: php-net-smtp (updated package)
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:28:21PM +0100, Guillaume Delacour wrote: So the only version to consider is 1.4.2-3 ot fix the grave bug, thanks in advance if you could take time to review and sponsor it (I've cc'ed Thomas because he wanted sponsor it as soon as possible). It has an older standards version. - Craig -- Craig Small VK2XLZhttp://www.enc.com.au/ csmall at : enc.com.au Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ csmall at : debian.org GPG fingerprint: 1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101127121605.ge15...@enc.com.au
Re: esekeyd and triggerhappy (Re: RFS: triggerhappy)
Dies schrieb Jonathan Nieder (jrnie...@gmail.com):
This information could be useful for both package descriptions.
(Maybe, for triggerhappy:
That is, this is similar to esekeyd but it also supports
such and such, allowing you to such and such.
and for esekeyd:
This package does not do such and such; for that, see
triggerhappy. In the simple situations it does handle,
esekeyd is {simpler to configure | compatible with the
old funkey daemon | more conservative in its use of
resources | providing a different interface that existing
users might be used to | whatever}.
) As you can see, there are some placeholders because I do not know
the packages; I am just saying it would be nice to provide the
sysadmin with advice of some sort to choose between them.
I'm not sure whether such a direct comparison of packages in their description
might be not be considered offensive to some and might incite some kind of arms
race: yo daemon so fat
Think of such comparisons in the description of gnome/kde or vim/emacs packages
:-)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101127152810.ga28...@zirkel.wertarbyte.de
Re: RFS: php-net-smtp (updated package)
Le samedi 27 novembre 2010 à 23:16 +1100, Craig Small a écrit : On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:28:21PM +0100, Guillaume Delacour wrote: So the only version to consider is 1.4.2-3 ot fix the grave bug, thanks in advance if you could take time to review and sponsor it (I've cc'ed Thomas because he wanted sponsor it as soon as possible). It has an older standards version. Yes, RT and Thomas said me to not upgrade Standards-Version to 3.9.1 to not introduce any other changes in the package. If needed, i could upgrade the package and had some minor improvments. - Craig -- Craig Small VK2XLZhttp://www.enc.com.au/ csmall at : enc.com.au Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ csmall at : debian.org GPG fingerprint: 1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5 signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Re: RFS: php-net-smtp (updated package)
On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 07:07:40PM +0100, Guillaume Delacour wrote: Yes, RT and Thomas said me to not upgrade Standards-Version to 3.9.1 to not introduce any other changes in the package. If needed, i could upgrade the package and had some minor improvments. Ah ok, that makes sense now. It's been uploaded. - Craig -- Craig Small VK2XLZhttp://www.enc.com.au/ csmall at : enc.com.au Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org/ csmall at : debian.org GPG fingerprint: 1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101127215534.ga10...@enc.com.au
Comparison of packages in package descriptions (Re: esekeyd and triggerhappy)
Stefan Tomanek wrote: I'm not sure whether such a direct comparison of packages in their description might be not be considered offensive to some and might incite some kind of arms race: yo daemon so fat Think of such comparisons in the description of gnome/kde or vim/emacs packages :-) That's why I'd be happy for you two to write them and not some zealots. Example: nvi Nvi is intended as a bug-for-bug compatible clone of the original BSD vi editor. As such, it doesn't have a lot of snazzy features as do some of the other vi clones such as elvis and vim. However, if all you want is vi, this is the one to get. See also [1]. The debian-l10n-english list can help with wording if you're having trouble being objective. :) Regards, Jonathan [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-pkg-desc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101127235628.ga9...@burratino
Re: RFS: php-net-smtp (updated package)
- Original message - On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 07:07:40PM +0100, Guillaume Delacour wrote: Yes, RT and Thomas said me to not upgrade Standards-Version to 3.9.1 to not introduce any other changes in the package. If needed, i could upgrade the package and had some minor improvments. Ah ok, that makes sense now. It's been uploaded. - Craig As Adam said Pre-Depends should be raised on -devel, which I did yesterday, I thought it would have been wise to give people the chance to reply. Never mind, thanks for the upload. Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1290908911.5820.2.ca...@nokia-n900-42-11
Re: RFS: aspell-kk
Hi Timur,
Timur Birsh wrote:
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
I'm not a DD so I can't upload your package, but here are a few
nitpicks.
. It seems this uses aspell 0.60 format. Shouldn't the package use
Provides: aspell6-dictionary, then?
In Debian Spelling Dictionaries and Tools Policy[1] I can't find any
information on it. Possibly there are another documents with guidelines on
the dictionaries packaging?
Not that I know of. Anyway, it seems I was wrong here (or rather
outdated: 5½ years ago I would have been right) and
Provides: aspell-dictionary
is right after all. Sorry for the confusion.
. debian/rules could be made much simpler by using dh. Not a problem
but it would make me happier to have less to read. :)
(In that format, it becomes obvious what specific customizations a
package has made to the usual sequence.)
I'm using debhelper to build a package.
Nothing wrong with that. :) See [1] for the variation I was suggesting.
. Similarly, I wonder if debian/postinst and debian/postrm are needed.
Won't debhelper set those up automatically?
AFAIK, set -e and exit 0 are recommended to use in maintainer scripts by
Debian Policy.
Doesn't debhelper add those automatically?
In other words, for curiosity's sake I'd suggest removing
debian/postinst and debian/postrm, rebuilding and reinstalling the
package, and looking at
/var/lib/dpkg/info/aspell-kk.{postinst,postrm}
FWIW I didn't test your package but I didn't see anything that should
prevent someone from uploading it.
Thanks for your work,
Jonathan
[1] http://kitenet.net/~joey/blog/entry/debhelper_dh_overrides/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20101128021130.ga1...@burratino
Re: RFS: alsaequal
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 2:40 AM, Alessandro Ghedini al3x...@gmail.com wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for my package alsaequal. ... libasound2-plugin-equal - Real-time adjustable equalizer plugin for ALSA. Seems like this would be a good fit for the Debian multimedia team. You might like to join them to help maintain other consumer/producer multimedia software within Debian. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimo+enrq2juoe=ac=j1ohnb2pf4rp7q2p1eg...@mail.gmail.com
