(I don't intend to sponsor this, sorry.)
* Barry Warsaw <ba...@python.org>, 2012-11-09, 20:27:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/python-apps/packages/tox/trunk/
I see some warnings in the build log:
| loading intersphinx inventory from http://docs.python.org/objects.inv...
| WARNING: intersphinx inventory 'http://docs.python.org/objects.inv' not fetchable due to
<class 'urllib2.URLError'>: <urlopen error [Errno -2] Name or service not known>
and:
| /build/tox-W107m9/tox-1.4.2/doc/index.txt:90: WARNING: toctree contains
reference to nonexisting document u'config-v1'
Furthermore, the package FTBFS if built twice in a row:
| dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file:
debian/manpage/_build/doctrees/environment.pickle
| dpkg-source: error: unwanted binary file:
debian/manpage/_build/doctrees/tox-man.doctree
| dpkg-source: error: detected 2 unwanted binary files (add them in
debian/source/include-binaries to allow their inclusion).
| dpkg-buildpackage: error: dpkg-source -b tox-1.4.2 gave error exit status 29
lintian emits:
I: tox source: binary-control-field-duplicates-source field "priority" in
package python-tox
P: python-tox: no-homepage-field
I: python-tox: possible-documentation-but-no-doc-base-registration
lintian4python emits:
x: tox source: missing-vcs-field vcs-svn
svn://svn.debian.org/python-apps/packages/tox/trunk/
x: tox source: missing-vcs-field vcs-browser
http://svn.debian.org/viewsvn/python-apps/packages/tox/trunk/
p: python-tox: SOURCES.txt-in-binary-package
e: python-tox: missing-dependency-for-import pkg_resources (usr/bin/tox) =>
python-pkg-resources
(+ some boring pyflakes-* tags)
I think section should be "python" not "misc"; priority should be
optional.
Current standards version is 3.9.4.
Shouldn't you add yourself to d/copyright?
The LICENSE file reads:
| The execnet package is released under the provisions of the Gnu Public
| License (GPL), version 2 or later.
Shouldn't it be s/execnet/tox/ and s/Gnu/GNU General/?
Licenses of toxbootstrap.py and tox/_verlib.py are not documented in the
copyright file.
P.S. I know the manpage sucks;
Agreed, it does.
Also, I think that adding full-blown makefile just to build a single
manpage is overkill. You could call sphinx-build manually in
debian/rules
I'm trying to find some examples of Sphinx-generated manpages, after
which I'll improve that.
Take a look at... sphinx-* manpages. Dogfooding FTW! :)
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121110215522.ga7...@jwilk.net
