Hi Juhani! Thanks for your reply, and sorry that I missed it! It was probably lost in the noise, was not really prepared for a reply from the bug so to speak. Listening to high-volume lists is not always easy :(
For better or worse, both upstream and the packaging has evolved since your review. On Tue, 16 Jan 2018 15:22:37 +0200 Juhani Numminen <juhaninummin...@gmail.com> wrote: > Alec Leamas kirjoitti 14.01.2018 klo 11:07: > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "ddupdate" > > Here's a review, but please note that I cannot sponsor you. It's a pity, but thanks anyway! Perhaps someone else could be motivated once we are finished with this... > I don't have network admin knowledge, so I didn't test the functionality of ddupdate. It's actually rather straight-forward these days, especially using the ddupdate-config configuration script (which wasn't there when you reviewed). That said, focusing on the packaging seems perfectly fine for me. > Please use up-to-date lintian. It'll give you an error tag and several > informational and pedantic tags, some of which are easily dealt with. I'm using sid, updated as of current?! > This review is based on the package you have uploaded to mentors, but I also > had a look at your git repo, where you wrote in a commit message: > > debian: Fix Standards-Version: to current sid 4.0.0 > Your sources for that information are outdated, you should check [1] instead. This one beats me... should I read it that current standard is 4.1.3? Fixing using the ideas Standards-Version == 4.1.3 and compat level == 11. Still unsure, though. > At the mentors site, you write: > > I cannot understand what's wrong with the copyright file. I guess it's a silly oversight. > > > > uscan works just fine for me, the watch file error seems weird. > > If you're referring to "P: ddupdate source: no-dep5-copyright", it's because your > debian/copyright doesn't follow the specification[2]: it doesn't have a header paragraph > and the license text for MIT isn't specified. Fixed > Uscan works for me as well, mentors.debian.net has a broken check indeed. Good to hear :) > debian/control: Please add Vcs-Git. To specify the branch, see Policy[1] §5.6.26. Fixed > Typo in Description: ubiquotious->ubiquitous. Fixed (actually not a typo, silly me couldn't spell it). > debian/ddupdate-docs.docs: There is no "ddupdate-docs" binary package so this file > doesn't do anything[3], please remove. Fixed > debian/README.debian: Typo: updatet->updated. Fixed > I think Debian should be capitalized as a proper noun in user documentation. Right, fixed > debian/rules: > Debhelper has picked Makefile instead of setup.py, so you should add > "--buildsystem=pybuild" after the --with arguments. Then you can remove override_dh_build, > override_dh_auto_install and override_dh_python3 rules, and delete the file debian/install. However, this is on purpose. I control upstream, and the Makefile actually does the right things. Is there anything wrong with this approach? That said, rules is in a much better shape since the review, cleaned up and with a dh_override_missing added. > However, this causes that every file that setup.py installs goes into the package. > To control what gets installed, you can add something like this to debian/rules: > override_dh_install: > dh_install > rm debian/ddupdate/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/CONTRIBUTE.md \ > debian/ddupdate/usr/share/doc/ddupdate/LICENSE.txt This is fixed upstream (which used to install these files, one of my really bad ideas). > The installed package is missing some Depends: "ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'straight'". Recent dependencies for the .deb package looks ok to me. Note that the straight.plugin and sudo deps have been dropped by upstream. Cheers! --alec
