Sponsorship/Review for package "karlyriceditor"

forum::für::umläute zmoelnig at umlaeute.mur.at
Mon May 26 15:46:12 UTC 2014


On 2014-05-21 23:26, Martin Steghöfer wrote:
> I tried it once, following the instructions on
> https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit, but decided against using it.
> It didn't simplify my work, but instead cluttered up my repository with
> the upstream source files. I don't get the point of having upstream
> files in the repository, if you're not allowed to touch them directly
> (only via patches).

i guess the point is, that you only need a single checkout to get
everything needed to build the package.

>
> What would be a "more 'debian' repo"? Just using the workflow mentioned
> on https://wiki.debian.org/PackagingWithGit? Or another repo host?

with that i meant a repository hosted on debian infrastructure.
most packaging repositories are hosted on alioth [1].
many alioth packaging teams such as pkg-multimedia (and to a lesser
extent collab-maint) mandate the workflow as outlined in [2].
(collab-maint probably does not mandate that workflow, but i haven't yet
seen a repository in collab-maint that does not use it; i haven't looked
too deeply though).


anyhow, i see that you changed the workflow :-)

>> debian/control:
>> - Vcs-Stanzas:
>>   seem to be missing (most likely because you would like to move the
>> packaging to a more "debian" repo?)
> I simply didn't use a repo yet, when I created the debian/control file.

the files in debian/control are "alive" insofar as they should be
adapted to the "current" state of affairs, rather than represent the
state of affairs when they were created.


>> - Description:
>>   all those acronyms don't mean anything to me; also "support for foo
>>   and bar specifics" sounds weird to me. should that read "supports
>>   formats foo and bar"?
> This was mainly taken from upstream. Tried to improve the readability:
> https://github.com/martin-steghoefer/debian-karlyriceditor/commit/bdf960a4

thanks.
you might also want to make *full* sentences.
rather than "Features foo. Supports bar." you should say "It features
foo. karlyriceditor supports bar."

> 
>> debian/rules:

is quite nice by now :-)


fgmasdr
IOhannes



More information about the pkg-multimedia-maintainers mailing list