-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Nicolas,
IANADD (twb told me, I shall be lazy!), here are some comments on your package: On 21.07.2011 09:13, Nicolas wrote: > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "phing". * Please extend description of the -doc package. Its a bit too short. You don't need to be too verbose, but please expand it by a few words. For example you could tell what exactly the package contains and what its purpose is. Compare with other -doc packages in Debian to get an idea * Your copyright looks pretty good, however "Copyright: 2001,2002 THYRELL" is probably a bit to few of information. Maybe add a contact address, I noticed in the code is listed one. Same for "2003, seasonfive". Yes, this is pure pedantry - feel free to ignore this. * There is a new upstream release. Please consider packaging it. Besides, the checksums of your orig.tar.gz don't not match with upstream's package, being it the full package or the PEAR one. Please don't touch it. $ sha1sum phing-2.4.5.tgz.1 bf4c5e709c9141555c299e02aab8ac80cddd2cf7 phing-2.4.5.tgz.1 (this is PEAR) $ sha1sum phing-2.4.5.tgz f3e2eb295317b79a9e4223c193430a2896883967 phing-2.4.5.tgz $ sha1sum phing_2.4.5.orig.tar.gz 367c6a92bee3d3c73c6b36c9afa35a122c1eb11c phing_2.4.5.orig.tar.gz * What's /usr/share/php/phing/etc for? Those files don't look like something which should be put in a etc-directory. I'm fine if you keep it that way in /usr/share/php/phing/etc, I'm just trying to find out, whether those files are meant to be touched at all. If so, they shouldn't reside in /usr. * In debian/rules, please remove unneeded comments dh-make produced. * Please generate your manpage during build. It seems to me, you ship it pre-compiled from the SGML man page you wrote. * Similar case for the API docs you package straight from the tarball. The DFSG mandate that a software package is available from source and its processing must be self-containing (e.g. compare with the "preferred form for modification" from the GPL license). For the generated API docs this means, there must be a way to regenerate those docs by means the main archive provides. You don't necessarily need to do this when producing the binary package, but please add at least a README.source file, where you document how to regenerate those API docs, upstream ships, if desired. * Your upstream tarball contains regression tests. Consider running them during build. Good work. Those are almost all cosmetic changes. - -- with kind regards, Arno Töll IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJOKFdFAAoJEMcrUe6dgPNtNsoQAMUK3PphZGXhVNczYPMDMffG DGlZdGJWkfpowsir6mVZiLMBVMxUsFTmgGuBZtWs2C90bPugPadLXLccs6AjT44f /8Y8nIqDvT2kCwW2O/Izh7QxwnnxNn6X1ryFQlphsJd7uPe6rGX4hHAs8xxEOFCL 06iJCIipq1yH2h7LhoaryFUh5Xng1fTSyzK7R8axEESPW7OUSiS94yrIEQA6d/Ki 4NzYkZjgLiFOqlX5rqa/k6tFs2qwoLVePc1bcwmbJB0ErC32sgnMC7u/gIEZn/g1 t8A11dw4BHwOWwHX8IqkjuIKC7IibSvVuPIIzg+GYRJcoXrgY/Vww6xwIFaK3wPS frhgxRSh8QSFNnHLixEIuZ1YyvunDpMhN6o33oPLaMWvWsoQAvNH2vHUEXIQIxTZ kzddqn0Y5XuuwjpXqIMJFytzL6nYMRSkJyRZrb5n1csgyNK99gi/Gczsm099YTAD ihHXtv9Cwgn3JYXfNdtchkJaLhRuh7ExdzmbR7/VsJ2/5HEpjVtuZK3Fpc8psckP UNRQDbFRUYNWhSuC5brnte++HbV+ZTInkOLi9Jb5lRr5/fdxVigfEK4ph1xV6rh4 me5/OYg6LxgXxlePYfsYXll0KaHTMWEuahzf5k1DQMnH3GFk6NSbpq2hYBt6DQHY P39Ag9vBdig83Y4DSoh+ =KAoz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- 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/4e285745.2050...@toell.net
