Am Donnerstag, den 26.07.2012, 09:06 -0500 schrieb Robert Park: > Quite the thorough review, thank you!
You're welcome. > >> Of course, it > >> looks like debian is in freeze, so I guess I'm supposed to pursue > >> acceptance in universe before I'll be able to get it into debian > >> unstable. Is that right? I filed a needs-packaging bug in launchpad. > > > > The Debian freeze prevents packages to move from unstable to testing, > > but it does not prevent new packages into unstable. It's recommended to > > get the package in Debian first and then use requestsync (or syncpackage > > if you have upload rights) to get it synced into Ubuntu. > > Yes in theory, however I've been following a few other people's > request for sponsorship in debian-mentors and it seems nearly > impossible to get sponsorship during the freeze, because nobody cares > about new packages and everybody is busy testing the frozen 'testing' > distro. Getting sponsors is sometimes complicated due to missing man power, but I doubt that this is connected to the freeze. > > I had a quick look at your package on mentors: > > > > 1) The changelog should only contain entries for version that are > > actually in the archive. In your case, only one changelog entry would > > remain. > > But the program has been packaged on a launchpad PPA up until this > point, so theoretically there are users in the wild with old versions > of this package. It's not like this is the first ever version of the > package and I just arbitrarily felt like creating a retroactive > changelog for nonexistent packages. Am I seriously supposed to > truncate the changelog just because I'm seeking the package's > inclusion in debian? It's my opinion, that debian/changelog should only contain entries for uploads to Debian. IMO every new upload to Debian should add only one new block in the changelog file. Having entries like "gottengeography (1.1-2) unstable; urgency=low" are misleading, because they were never uploaded to unstable. It should at least detectable, what versions were uploaded to Debian and which were uploaded somewhere else. > > 8) Do you really need patches for your Debian package? > > Why not? The patches are mostly to do with distutils, specifically in > the sense that the 'upstream' tarball is configured to be able to run > uninstalled, but the debian package drops some of that code because it > was interfering with the building of the package. Not every change there looks like a needed packaging change. Example: --- gottengeography-2.1.orig/gg/version.py +++ gottengeography-2.1/gg/version.py @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ APPNAME='GottenGeography' PACKAGE='gottengeography' -VERSION='2.0' +VERSION='2.1' AUTHOR='Robert Park' EMAIL='rbp...@exolucere.ca' -- Benjamin Drung Debian & Ubuntu Developer
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- Ubuntu-motu mailing list Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
