Sure, here you go: About packaging: 1. debian/control: Maintainer should be "Ubuntu Developers <[email protected]>" 2. debian/control: Long description looks more like a marketing slogan than a package description 3. debian/copyright: Should mention copyright 2010 Canonical Ltd. (under BSD License) for debian/* 4. debian/dirs, debian/rules: No need for dirs and dh_installdirs (dirs will be created when files are installed anyway). 5. debian/rules: Any reason not to use an debian/install file to take care of file copy ? 6. debian/rules: if you use an "install" file, then you should just override dh_fixperms and you're good to go :)
See branch at lp:~ttx/ubuntu/lucid/cloudfusion/cloudfusion.lucid for the proposed changes in 4-6 About contents: There are two upstream distributions for this. One at http://tarzan-aws.googlecode.com/files/cloudfusion_2.5.zip is numbered "2.5" and includes the cachecore and requestcore libraries, as well as .git leftovers, but does not include README.textile. The other at http://github.com/cloudfusion/cloudfusion/tarball/2.5.0 is cleaner, numbered "2.5.0", includes README.textile but does not include the libraries. I'm not sure which one should be picked... -- [needs-packaging] cloudfusion https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/522877 You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
