Hi Andrey, thanks a lot for your review
On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Andrey Rahmatullin <w...@debian.org> wrote:
>
> Consider maintaining this in the DPMT (I've seen pylama added to the topic
> of #debian-python but we add only team packages there).
>
Ok, I've added the team in the Uploader field (if I add it in the
Maintainer field I cannot sign the package, and is considered as an nmu),
is that enough?
> You shouldn't use ${shlibs:Depends} for packages without ELF binaries.
>
Ok, done
> As the packages contain public modules it's a bad idea to have py2 and py3
> versions conflict with each other. If the modules are usable only by the
> pylama app, you should package only the py3 version in some private path
> and call the package pylama. If they are usable as python modules
> (importable) then either the binaries should have different names or (if
> it doesn't matter for the user which version is used) probably only the
> py3 version should be packaged.
>
Finally only the py3 version is present.
> See also https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/python-policy/
> The license of debian/* shouldn't be stricter that the upstream license
> (though this is debatable I think).
>
Fixed, LGPL-3 for all
> The package contains tests which aren't run by your debian/rules. On a
> first glance they are supposed to be run using py.test and pybuild can be
> asked to use that.
>
>
Ok, fixed. I've uploaded the new version to mentors.
dget -x
http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/p/pylama/pylama_6.2.0-1.dsc
Cheers!
--
Federico Gimenez
fgime...@canonical.com
