yes, it can be confusing since the package name is just 'z' library and '.' emphasis the space z and lib. should i revert it back it zimg? this package closes https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=864888 looks like i forget to mention in request template,but added it in debian/changelog
On 18 June 2017 at 14:27, Ghislain Vaillant <ghisv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, 2017-06-18 at 00:54 +0530, Sanjeev wrote: >> Package: sponsorship-requests >> Severity: wishlist >> >> Dear mentors, >> >> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "zimg" >> >> * Package name : zimg >> Version : 2.5.1-1 >> Upstream Author : sekrit-twc >> * URL : https://github.com/sekrit-twc/zimg >> * License : WTFPL >> Section : libs >> >> It builds those binary packages: >> >> libzimg-dev - devel file for z.lib library >> libzimg-examples - examples using z.lib library >> libzimg2 - z.lib shared library > > Am I the only one concerned about the confusion between the standard > zlib library and this z.lib? > >> To access further information about this package, please visit the >> following URL: >> >> https://mentors.debian.net/package/zimg >> >> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this >> command: >> >> dget -x >> https://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/z/zimg/zimg_2.5.1-1.dsc >> >> Changes since the last upload: >> >> add file to copyright > > This looks wrong. What is the ITP bug you are supposed to close with > this initial upload? It should be referenced in the change log. > > Ghis
