Hi Andreas! On 01/11/12 22:04, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Tomás, > > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 03:32:28PM +0100, Tomás Di Domenico wrote: >> Your last email made things much clearer. > > Great! As far as I can see the packaging heading quite in the direction > of becoming a ready package. :D > >> This is what I've done since then: >> >> 1) Recreated the git repository, as I had missed the first step for >> creating the Debian Med standard branches > > These are looking fine. I had no trouble using git-buildpackage to > create a package. > >> 2) Submitted the ITP bug report > > Fine. The ITP is OK in general. As a hint for the future: It is a > good idea to add a hint that the package is maintained in the Debian Med > team and it also does not harm to mention the Vcs-Git information where > you did your packaging. > I see. These hints you mention, would they go in the package description?
>> 3) Committed the current version of the package. It currently builds >> with no problems (lintian reports nothing), and the resulting .deb is >> functional. I installed it with dpkg and the Python module is available >> in the system. > > Yes. > >> So, very happy to have a working package, but I know there are still >> millions of things to fix and change. If you could take a look and point >> me towards the next steps, I'd greatly appreciate it. > > At first some nitpicking: The debian/rules file does contain the > usual comment of the dh-make template - please remove this or replace > it by something more reasonable than "Sample debian/rules ..." > > Now for the real problems: If you try > > lintian -i -I *.changes > > in the dir where your packaging results are placed lintian finds two > issues with formally low priority. However, both deserve fixing. So > writing a debian/watch file is something we try to approach for every > package if somehow possible. > I've looked into the upstream site (http://csb.codeplex.com), and I can't seem to find a page where you would get direct access to the .tar.gz file. Instead you get a series of redirects. Apparently, the 'https://csb.codeplex.com/releases/' url will redirect you to the final release, but the actual link to the sources file is not explicitly linked from the page source. Would the tool be able to handle this kind of redirects? > The other warning claims about large /usr/share but if I'm not totally > missleaded it is rather the case that the whole package is architecture > independant and thus the problem can easily fixed by > > Architecture: all > > in debian/control. > Yes, changing the architecture to "all" seems to solve that issue. > Once these issues are fixed I consider the package ready for upload. > However, Laszlo had last time consulted the python-modules team. I > think this is a very good idea and I would like you to ask for > additional advise on the Python modules team list on alioth. > Great. As soon as I figure out the 'watch' file I'll get in touch with the python-modules team. > Kind regards > > Andreas. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/50931110.2060...@tdido.com.ar
