Hi Phil, Thanks for the review - much appreciated!
On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 09:57:20AM +0000, Phil Wyett wrote: > Test 3 (build twice): Information [...] > https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=986234 Yes, I tried to fix this but to no avail. I think the package needs attention from someone who can grok autotools! According to the bug report this isn't RC, although clearly not ideal. > Test 6 (debian/watch): Information > > philwyett@ks-tarkin:~/Development/builder/debian/calcurse-4.8.1$ uscan --dehs > <dehs> > <package>calcurse</package> > <debian-uversion>4.8.1</debian-uversion> > <debian-mangled-uversion>4.8.1</debian-mangled-uversion> > <upstream-version>4.8.0</upstream-version> > <upstream-url>https://git.calcurse.org/calcurse.git > refs/tags/v4.8.0</upstream- > url> > <status>only older package available</status> > </dehs> Upstream have clearly released 4.8.1 but for some reason haven't tagged it, either in the above VCS or the new one they seem to use on GitHub. It probably warrants an enquiry with upstream about how they plan to do future releases. > Test 7 (licenserecon): Information > > d/copyright | licensecheck > > BSD-2-clause | FSFULLR config.rpath I think this is covered by policy 2.3: Thus, the copyright information for files in the source package which are only part of its build process, such as autotools files, need not be included in /usr/share/doc/PACKAGE/copyright, because those files do not get installed into the binary package. > Summary > ======= > > Andrew, Above is some information. Will you be looking to address the results > of tests 3 and 6? 7 is not really essential in an NMU. As a new contributor to Debian I am still calibrating what is appropriate for an NMU! In principle I'd be happy to do more to bring this package a bit more into shape but I don't really have time right now unfortunately. I don't use calcurse yet myself but hope to do so soon - it looks like a nice application. I hope it makes it into trixie. Thanks again, Andrew
