On Thu, Jun 06, 2019 at 12:42:48PM +0200, Andre Noll wrote: > On Wed, Jun 05, 15:49, Adam Borowski wrote > > On Wed, Jun 05, 2019 at 02:31:09PM +0200, Andre Noll wrote: > > > That's the old hen and egg problem: One needs to provide a bug number > > > in debian/changelog for the initial RFS, i.e. before the bug has been > > > opened. So I put a dummy number there and forgot to update it after > > > the bug number had been assigned. Fixed now. > > > > The RFS and ITP are unrelated. > > IDGI. For an RFS email one needs to provide the source package with > a debian/ directory, correct? If so, the debian/changelog file must > contain a line of the form > > * Initial Release. Closes: #929467 > > But the number will only be assigned after the mail has been sent. > What am I missing here?
You file ITP stating you intend to work on package X. Once you're done, you file a RFS. > > > > On the other hand, the package neither ships any data files, nor can't > > > > handle their lack gracefully: it crashes with: > OK. Do you think it makes sense to provide another package which > installs a few tagged epigrams in, say, /usr/share/games/tfortunes > and make tfortune fall back to this directory if ~/.tfortune does > not exist? That'd be nice. What about tfortune-data that ships as many good epigrams as you have, that's Recommended: by tfortune? Meow! -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Sometimes you benefit from delegating stuff. For example, ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ this way I get to be a vegetarian. ⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀
