Small fixes for the Ruby Policy document

2013-09-10 Thread Francesco Poli (wintermute)
Hello, I read the Ruby Policy draft [1] and I noticed some minor flaws (typos, outdated statements, ...). I thought I could prepare a patch and send it to this list. Please Cc me on replies, if any, since I am not subscribed to debian-ruby. Thanks. Please note that my proposed fixes are really t

[PATCH] small fixes

2013-09-10 Thread Francesco Poli (wintermute)
--- ruby-policy.mdw | 25 + 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/ruby-policy.mdw b/ruby-policy.mdw index 9fb8981..b73fc81 100644 --- a/ruby-policy.mdw +++ b/ruby-policy.mdw @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ Background There are several “subpolicies” in Debian. T

Re: RFS: ruby-base62 0.1.4-1

2013-09-10 Thread Thomas Bechtold
Hi Cédric, On 09/10/2013 05:02 PM, Cédric Boutillier wrote: > Here are a few comments: > > * debian/changelog: replace UNRELEASED by unstable Done. > * debian/control: > - uncomment the Vcs-* fields > - the "short" description is too long. At the moment, it is a mere > copy of the long

Re: RFS: ruby-base62 0.1.4-1

2013-09-10 Thread Cédric Boutillier
Dear Thomas, On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:07:42AM +0200, Thomas Bechtold wrote: > Hi, > The following package is ready to be uploaded (I also verified the > points listed on > http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship, but > it's my first ruby package and I'm a ruby newbie

RFS: ruby-base62 0.1.4-1

2013-09-10 Thread Thomas Bechtold
Hi, The following package is ready to be uploaded (I also verified the points listed on http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Ruby/Packaging#Requesting_Sponsorship, but it's my first ruby package and I'm a ruby newbie so I'm not sure if I handled the rubygem patching correct). Could you please review and