[Pkg-mozext-maintainers] Bug#623970: Bug#623970: ITP: xul-ext-cookie-monster -- please package Iceweasel Cookie Monster extension

[Fabrizio Regalli]

On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 17:39 +0200, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2011 at 05:19:15PM +0200, Fabrizio Regalli wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-09-09 at 15:02 +0200, Jérémy Bobbio wrote:
> > > Here is my review:
> > > 
> > >  * Files in pristine-tar are wrongly named
> > > 
> > >    Trying to build the package with `git-buildpackage
> > >    --git-pristine-tar` fails with:
> > > 
> > >       pristine-tar: git show refs/heads/pristine-tar:cookie-monster_1.0.5.orig.tar.gz.delta failed
> > > 
> > >    Indeed. The files are currently named
> > >    `cookie-monster_1.0.5.tar.gz.{delta,id}`.
> 
> This one is indeed fixed.

Right.

> 
> > >  * dpkg-source: error: unrepresentable changes to source
> > > 
> > >    As upstream does not ship .tar.gz (or .tar.bz2 for that matter) that
> > >    Debian could directly use, we need to create a .orig.tar.gz from
> > >    upstream source.
> > > 
> > >    So we are free to fiddle with upstream source in order to get the
> > >    files as close as we would like upstream to ship them. I then
> > >    strongly advocate to have a .orig.tar.gz where cookiemonster.jar
> > >    is unpacked.
> > > 
> > >    That will also remove the useless patch in debian/patches and ease
> > >    future reviews of upstream changes
> > 
> > Right. I started now from scratch and these problems are solved.
> 
> This one is not, IMHO.
> 
> It is *way* better to have an _unpacked_ source tree as upstream.
> Otherwise, reviewing upstream changes is going to be a pain. Writing
> patches against upstream source is going to be even more than that.

A 'repack.sh' script that grabs and unpack the .jar file and re-create
the tarball could be a reasonable solution?
Or download the xpi, unpack the jar and create .orig.tar.gz from it
(including install.rdf file) is enough?



> 
> > >  * Package is missing a README.source
> > > 
> > >    Even if it's not mandatory, the package is really missing a
> > >    README.source. It is supposed to be under the pkg-mozext umbrella,
> > >    so other member of that team should be able to upload the package
> > >    if the need arises.
> > > 
> > >    Things that ought to be documented are at least: git-buildpackage
> > >    usage, pristine-tar usage, the upstream-changelog file (why, what and
> > >    how to update it).
> > 
> > Usually I never used, but if necessary I can create it.
> 
> Am I supposed to guess everything about this uncommon
> `debian/upstream-changelog` file alone?

Don't know, but if you take a look at 'tabmixplus' package for example
you can check by yourself that the README.source does not exist (and
upstream changelog exists)


> > >  * Inaccurate copyright file
> > > 
> > >    The copyright file that gets installed in
> > >    /usr/share/doc/xul-ext-cookie-monster/copyright is inaccurate,
> > >    as the MPL license is not copied to the same directory.
> > 
> > I create a new copyright file, hoping this time is right.
> 
> Is the MPL file going to be copied automatically in
> /usr/share/doc/xul-ext-cookie-monster?

Sorry, my fault. (I forget to commit 'docs' file to git)

Cheers,
Fabrizio.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mozext-maintainers/attachments/20110909/3822f388/attachment.pgp>