On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 17:44, Oxan van Leeuwen <o...@oxanvanleeuwen.nl> wrote: > Hi Sandro, > > Thanks for your reply! > > On 04-02-11 16:35, Sandro Tosi wrote: >> >> Hi Oxan, >> >> you decided to put the team in Uploaders: do you understand what it >> means (for DPMT) ? (it's just a check ;) > > I think I did that according to the policy on Alioth [1], which has > different content than on the wiki page [2]. Given that I'm fine with the > team taking over > when I'm too busy (hopefully not needed ;-)), I've switched the fields.
that's, that's very nice of you :) >> debian/copyright >> - ehm: >> Files: debian/* >> Copyright: 2010, 2011, Oxan van Leeuwen<o...@oxanvanleeuwen.nl> >> License: Apache-2 or GPL-2+ >> >> either stay with apache-2 or with gpl2+: what's the need for this >> uncertainty and the possible dual licensing for debian packaging code? >> (hint: i'd go with the same license of upstream code, less legal issue >> in case of patching and so). > > I think that was left over from packaging the older 1.x release (never > submitted for inclusion into Debian), where I indeed licensed the packaging > GPL-2+ to match upstream code. I've removed the GPL-2+ license from the > copyright file as it doesn't make any sense now. thanks! >> - can you please specify where did you find the 2011 copyright for >> upstream code? I can only see LICENSE.txt containing the 2010. Also, >> can you please ask upsteram author to put a real name& email in >> copyright notice? It's not a must but a nice to have :) > > I thought I found the 2011 somewhere, but that was wrong. apparantly not. > I've asked the upstream author for his comments on the licensing [3] and > changed the copyright year to 2010. > > [3] https://github.com/Yelp/python-gearman/issues/issue/8 > >> debian/patches/01_include_docs_conf >> - ask upstream to add teh file to the manifest, so it will be included >> in the next tarball > > Done: https://github.com/Yelp/python-gearman/issues/issue/7 > >> - you could upload to experimental, where sphinx>= 1 is alive and >> kicking - what would you do? > > Well, given that I don't see much value in adding the source code to the > documentation (it's already on your system and you usually don't need it), I > prefer uploading to unstable. ok then >> - why you don't install .js files? ok, they should not be shipped in >> the binary package but a link to libjs-query files instead, but you're >> not making it either. > > I've added a link to the libjs-query package instead of completely removing > it. Rationale behind the suggests instead of recommends is that the package > will mostly be installed as a dependency of other packages (library package) > and thus the documentation won't be read by most of the users. It also works > fine without libjs-jquery. (other packages in the DPMT seem to be > inconsistent, some use Recommends and some use Suggests). yup that's fine. Sorry I didn't noticed first: you can remove also "XB-Python-Version: ${python:Versions}" from d/control Just a sanity check: the short descr say this package is an interface to the Gearman libs, but no depends on any gearman package is in d/control; what I'm not getting? :) Other than that, I don't see any other points to fix, so let's get those 2 squashed and we're ready to go. Cheers, -- Sandro Tosi (aka morph, morpheus, matrixhasu) My website: http://matrixhasu.altervista.org/ Me at Debian: http://wiki.debian.org/SandroTosi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktimoa7oxe8zop6zpb1sn99t1ba3jxp8fw2xfy...@mail.gmail.com
