Hello:
I have just upload a revisited version of my package that addresses
the below points when applicable.
Please find below quick answers to the points.
On 15/02/12 12:05, Benoît Knecht wrote:
Hi Jerome,
Jerome Benoit wrote:
I am looking for a sponsor for my package "bibtool".
* Package name : bibtool
Version : 2.53-1
Upstream Author : Gerd Neugebauer<g...@gerd-neugebauer.de>
* URL :
http://www.gerd-neugebauer.de/software/TeX/BibTool/index.en.html
* License : GPL-1+
Section : tex
It builds those binary packages:
bibtool - tool for BibTeX database manipulation
I took a look at your package, here are a few comments:
- debian/preinst has a comment saying it should be removed post-etch;
now seems like it'd be a good time.
It was wiped out.
- lintian gives a few warnings:
P: bibtool source: source-contains-cvs-control-dir regex-0.12/doc/CVS
P: bibtool source: source-contains-cvs-control-dir regex-0.12/CVS
P: bibtool source: unversioned-copyright-format-uri
http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5
Using the relevant lintian options I could observed those warnings, and I fixed
them
(thanks to the upstream maintainer).
You may want to get in touch with upstream about that. Also, ideally
regex shouldn't be embedded in the source.
I am considering to build a Debian Source to get ride of more useless material
from a Debian perspective.
- I'm not sure why you're closing bugs #291134 and #187255 in the
changelog; they're not fixed by this upload in particular, they're
just not considered bugs. I think you should close these bugs
manually and remove those two entries from the changelog.
Those bugs were closed are non bugs.
The second entry ("Features have been either"...) doesn't seem very
useful; either give a brief summary of the changed features, or
remove the entry entirely. The first entry ("New upstream version")
essentially suggests that there are new or extended features, and
users should know to check the upstream changelog already.
I am agree: I clean up this part.
(Actually, looking into it, there isn't even an entry for 2.53 in
Changes.xml.)
- In debian/copyright, you list yourself as the sole copyright holder
for the files under debian/*, but you didn't do the packaging from
scratch. What about the copyright of the previous maintainers?
fixed !
- In the bibtool(1) man page, the FILES section states "none" and the
DIAGNOSTICS section "many"; I think both sections should simply be
removed.
In the SEE ALSO section, the BibTool Manual is referred to as
bibtool.tex, but this file isn't installed on Debian; instead, it
should refer to bibtool.pdf.gz installed in /usr/share/doc/bibtool.
Also, in the .TH header in bibtool.1, something more useful than
"local" (like a date for instance) should be used.
I took the opportunity to update the bibtool.1 man page and to submit it to
the upstream maintainer who kindly integrated it modulo minor changes.
- Have you forwarded your patches for inclusion upstream?
I got in touch with the upstream maintainer a few week ago to report issues and
to submit patches:
the upstream maintainer kindly cleaned up the source of the coming version and
he integrated all the patches
except a cosmetic one. Since then, I have kept in touch with him to fix more
issues in the coming version.
I hope this helps.
It helped.
Cheers,
Thanks,
Jerome
--
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/4f407c79.5010...@rezozer.net
