On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 6:55 PM Martin-Éric Racine
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 5:52 PM Santiago R.R. <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > El 28/02/22 a las 16:52, Martin-Éric Racine escribió:
> > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:42 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 4:26 PM Martin-Éric Racine
> > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:45 PM Santiago R.R. 
> > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > * Could you please fix the indentation of the your new entry in 
> > > > > > d/copyright?
> > > > >
> > > > > IMHO, the whole file's indentation needs to be fixed. I had troubles
> > > > > aligning my addition, because the file currently uses TAB+2SPACES.
> > > > > There really should be a linting tool for that.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, it seems that wrap-and-sort can be used for d/copyright too.
> > > > I somehow was under the impression that it's only used for d/control.
> > > > I'm extremely tempted to run it on the whole package.
> > >
> > > Reading back on Bug #964947, I notice that the request was for both
> > > packaging current upstream and dropping the 5 out of the package name.
> > > I would tend to agree. The 5 really only was meant as an upstream
> > > branch tag.  The source and binary really should be called 'dhcpcd'
> > > since it essentially is a fork of the abandoned source of the same
> > > name.
> >
> > Changing the source name means creating (or reintroducing) a different
> > debian package. Just in case:
> > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=743218
> >
> > Changing the binary name only means it would have to pass by NEW…
>
> Merely changing the binary name sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Please note that I have re-uploaded the package to Mentors. The log
file is more explicit about cosmetic changes and about ./configure
caveats.

Martin-Éric

Reply via email to