RFS: nd (updated package)

[Mats Erik Andersson-5]

Dear mentors,

I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-3
of my package "nd".

It builds these binary packages:
nd         - Tiny little command line WebDAV interface

The package appears to be lintian clean.
It builds equally cleanly on "testing" as on "stable".

The upload would fix these bugs: 408084, 541055

The package can be found on mentors.debian.net:
- URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nd
- Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free
- dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/n/nd/nd_0.8.2-3.dsc

I would be glad if someone uploaded this package for me.


Kind regards

 Mats Erik Andersson


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Tim Retout]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 07:02:09PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> Dear mentors,
>
> I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-3
> of my package "nd".

Great! Comments below.

Since your NMU did not get uploaded to Debian, you should be okay to
combine the two debian/changelog entries.

It looks to me like your debian/rules could be reduced almost as far
as /usr/share/doc/debhelper/examples/rules.tiny, but adding a --with
quilt option to dh.  I haven't tested this, but it would make it
easier to understand (for me).  If you do this, you need Build-Depends
as described at:
http://pkg-perl.alioth.debian.org/debhelper.html#dh___with_quilt

Is debian/nd.dirs really meant to contain /usr/bin?

debian/nd.docs is superfluous - debian/copyright doesn't need to be in
there, and the two README files and the empty NEWS file are pretty
useless.

You should add http://gohome.org/nd/ as a Homepage field in
debian/control.

I'll give it another review if you fix these. :) I think I just need
to check the copyright matches the source.

--
Tim Retout <tim@...>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Mats Erik Andersson-5]

Dear Tim Retout,

torsdag den 10 december 2009 klockan 00:08 skrev Tim Retout detta:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 07:02:09PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> > Dear mentors,
> >
> > I am looking for a sponsor for the new version 0.8.2-3
> > of my package "nd".
>
> Great! Comments below.
>

I had given up on this package!

> It looks to me like your debian/rules could be reduced almost as far
> as /usr/share/doc/debhelper/examples/rules.tiny, but adding a --with
>
>    [ more advice ]
> --
> Tim Retout <tim@...>

I have follow almost all your advice. The revised package is
still in the same spot with the same name. Thank you!


For leasure readers seeking edification, this is now the rules
file in extenso:

      #!/usr/bin/make -f

      %:
          dh --with quilt $@

Beware that the build machine now needs at least quilt_0.46-7,
so it cannot be done on a Lenny only system, where 0.46-6 would
be present there. This fooled me on my primary work bench system.

Best regards,

Mats Erik Andersson <mats.andersson@...>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Tim Retout]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:35:33PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> I have follow almost all your advice. The revised package is
> still in the same spot with the same name. Thank you!

Heh. Next time follow *all* the advice. :)

nd.docs does not need to contain debian/README.Debian - see the man
page for dh_installdocs.

I still think that the README file shipped by upstream is pointless
for the Debian package - it is just a description of the program, plus
installation instructions.

(So please remove debian/nd.docs in the next version.)

I would prefer more detail in your changelog entries in future.  You
missed such things as bumping the Standards-Version to 3.8.3, and
adding README.source and README.Debian - if you can't remember what
you've changed, use 'debdiff'.  See:

http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-debian-changelog

I would err on the side of documenting too much, rather than too
little.

The Developers Reference recommends the "Closes: #NNNNNN" style for
changelog entries, rather than "Closes: bug#NNNNNN".  See:

http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/pkgs.html#upload-bugfix

I don't think the README.Debian adds much to the package - discussion
of bugs should be made on the bug tracking system.  You should file
another bug against the package detailing the segmentation fault that
can still happen, and then try to fix it.

The debian/copyright file could be cleaned up, but it seems to be
accurate enough.

I disagree with some of the changes made to the description in
debian/control, and think it still needs improving - there's a mailing
list to help with writing English descriptions... erm... go find
it. :)

You could modernise the patch descriptions to use the proposed DEP-3
format.

Anyway, having said the above, I've uploaded the package as-is.
Please contact me directly for sponsorship of future versions (either
email, IRC or XMPP).

Please send your compilation warning fixes to the upstream maintainer,
if you can make contact.

Also let me know if you need sponsorship for any other packages (I see
you maintain windowlab already), or if you have NMU diffs for RC bugs,
or things like that.  I'm a little bit busy moving house tomorrow, and
it might be a few weeks before I have a reliable internet connection
again, but I should respond to email.

Thanks for your work,

--
Tim Retout <tim@...>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Paul Wise-3]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Mats Erik Andersson
<mats.andersson@...> wrote:

> For leasure readers seeking edification, this is now the rules
> file in extenso:
>
>      #!/usr/bin/make -f
>
>      %:
>          dh --with quilt $@

If you switch to dpkg-source v3, you don't even need --with quilt.

--
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Mats Erik Andersson-5]

Dear Tim Retout,

fredag den 11 december 2009 klockan 00:28 skrev Tim Retout detta:
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:35:33PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> > I have follow almost all your advice. The revised package is
> > still in the same spot with the same name. Thank you!
>
> Heh. Next time follow *all* the advice. :)
>

I did not expect it to be accepted right away, in particular due
to the bug remark I inserted.

> I don't think the README.Debian adds much to the package - discussion
> of bugs should be made on the bug tracking system.  You should file
> another bug against the package detailing the segmentation fault that
> can still happen, and then try to fix it.

I discovered this segmentation fault four days ago, and suddenly
your message of sponsoring this package came quite unexpectedly.
I had honestly begun wondering wether to withdraw the package due
to this segfault.

>
> The debian/copyright file could be cleaned up, but it seems to be
> accurate enough.
>
> I disagree with some of the changes made to the description in
> debian/control, and think it still needs improving - there's a mailing
> list to help with writing English descriptions... erm... go find
> it. :)

Both these are from at least 2003, I have never bothered.
Right, I did insert ", and" as well as change a comma to a colon!

Honestly, I am somewhat lost as to the agility a new package
maintainer should display in rewriting documentation that
a previous maintainer has compiled. Am I at liberty to modify
the texts according to my own taste, or am I to preserve as
much as possible of the previous text?

>
> Thanks for your work,
>
> --
> Tim Retout <tim@...>

Thank you for the comments.

--
Mats Erik Andersson, fil. dr


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...

[Tim Retout]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 12:19:44PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:

> fredag den 11 december 2009 klockan 00:28 skrev Tim Retout detta:
> > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 01:35:33PM +0100, Mats Erik Andersson wrote:
> > > I have follow almost all your advice. The revised package is
> > > still in the same spot with the same name. Thank you!
> >
> > Heh. Next time follow *all* the advice. :)
> >
>
> I did not expect it to be accepted right away, in particular due
> to the bug remark I inserted.

I took the view that this version was fixing a bug, and is an
incremental improvement over the existing version in Debian.  Any
remaining faults should be fixable by further uploads.  It's more
important that the package has an active maintainer than that it is
perfect.

One way of indicating that a package is not yet intended for release
is to use 'UNRELEASED' rather than 'unstable' in the first changelog
line.  debchange (dch) has some support for this - use
'DEBCHANGE_RELEASE_HEURISTIC=changelog' in ~/.devscripts.

> > I don't think the README.Debian adds much to the package - discussion
> > of bugs should be made on the bug tracking system.  You should file
> > another bug against the package detailing the segmentation fault that
> > can still happen, and then try to fix it.
>
> I discovered this segmentation fault four days ago, and suddenly
> your message of sponsoring this package came quite unexpectedly.
> I had honestly begun wondering wether to withdraw the package due
> to this segfault.

It's just a bug, and I don't believe it was introduced by any the cast
fixes.

Is it the same as #366914?  (It might be related - 403 vs. 404
errors.)  If you need help debugging it with gdb, I could lend a hand.

> > The debian/copyright file could be cleaned up, but it seems to be
> > accurate enough.
> >
> > I disagree with some of the changes made to the description in
> > debian/control, and think it still needs improving - there's a mailing
> > list to help with writing English descriptions... erm... go find
> > it. :)
>
> Both these are from at least 2003, I have never bothered.
> Right, I did insert ", and" as well as change a comma to a colon!
>
> Honestly, I am somewhat lost as to the agility a new package
> maintainer should display in rewriting documentation that
> a previous maintainer has compiled. Am I at liberty to modify
> the texts according to my own taste, or am I to preserve as
> much as possible of the previous text?

You are free to change whatever you want - obviously it's better if
the changes make improvements. :)

--
Tim Retout <tim@...>


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-REQUEST@...
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@...