Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.maint.python > #9046 > unrolled thread

RFS: python-jsonref 0.1

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.maint.python

Contents

  RFS: python-jsonref 0.1 Paolo Greppi <paolo.greppi@libpf.com> - 2016-11-29 08:40 +0100
    Re: RFS: python-jsonref 0.1 Mattia Rizzolo <mattia@debian.org> - 2016-12-31 16:30 +0100
      Re: RFS: python-jsonref 0.1 Paolo Greppi <paolo.greppi@libpf.com> - 2017-05-24 14:00 +0200

#9046 — RFS: python-jsonref 0.1

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi,

I packaged python-jsonref as per this ITP:
https://bugs.debian.org/844986, this is the repo:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/packages/python-jsonref.git

Please someone more experienced than me review it and if it's OK sponsor
its upload.

Thanks,

Paolo

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#9120

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Hi Paolo,
<fill here my recommendations about RFS bugs..>

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:33:20AM +0100, Paolo Greppi wrote:
> I packaged python-jsonref as per this ITP:
> https://bugs.debian.org/844986, this is the repo:
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/packages/python-jsonref.git
> 
> Please someone more experienced than me review it and if it's OK sponsor
> its upload.

* git is lacking a pristine-tar branch, please push it (I don't even try
  to build without)
* d/control:
  + please wrap-and-sort that list of build-deps
  + maintainer is you, and DPMT is nowhere to be seen
  + why is Testsuite commented out?
* please bump compat to 10
* d/rules:
  + I think you need to also do --with sphinx to have dh_sphnixdocs do
    it's job?
* d/copyright:
  + why are you listing all the files instead of using wildcards?!
  + is there a particular reason the license of debian/ is different and
    more stricter than upstream's?
  + no need to repeat "Copyright (C)" on the Copyright: lines
  + also I very much like emails in d/copright
  + the license field of upstream also include the copyright notice, it
    shouldn't
* that proxytypes.py has a "based on the implementation..", are you sure
  that's not under a different copyright/license? (if so upstream might
  be at fault here, and this package might not be redistributable)


-- 
regards,
                        Mattia Rizzolo

GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18  4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540      .''`.
more about me:  https://mapreri.org                             : :'  :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri                  `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia  `-

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9528

Il 31/12/2016 16:22, Mattia Rizzolo ha scritto:
> 
> Hi Paolo,
> <fill here my recommendations about RFS bugs..>

Hi Mattia, recommendations received ...

> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 08:33:20AM +0100, Paolo Greppi wrote:
>> I packaged python-jsonref as per this ITP:
>> https://bugs.debian.org/844986, this is the repo:
>> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/python-modules/packages/python-jsonref.git
>>
>> Please someone more experienced than me review it and if it's OK sponsor
>> its upload.
> 
> * git is lacking a pristine-tar branch, please push it (I don't even try
>   to build without)

oops, should be fine now

> * d/control:
>   + please wrap-and-sort that list of build-deps

OK

>   + maintainer is you, and DPMT is nowhere to be seen

set DPMT as maintainer and myself as uploader

>   + why is Testsuite commented out?

uncommented

> * please bump compat to 10

OK

> * d/rules:
>   + I think you need to also do --with sphinx to have dh_sphnixdocs do
>     it's job?

indeed the *-doc package was empty; I had a look at this:
https://wiki.debian.org/Python/LibraryStyleGuide#Sphinx_documentation
plus some inspiration from other python packages, should be OK now

> * d/copyright:
>   + why are you listing all the files instead of using wildcards?!

simplified

>   + is there a particular reason the license of debian/ is different and
>     more stricter than upstream's?

because I want my Debian contributions to be GPL'd

>   + no need to repeat "Copyright (C)" on the Copyright: lines

OK

>   + also I very much like emails in d/copright

OK

>   + the license field of upstream also include the copyright notice, it
>     shouldn't

OK

> * that proxytypes.py has a "based on the implementation..", are you sure
>   that's not under a different copyright/license? (if so upstream might
>   be at fault here, and this package might not be redistributable)

I looked it up, it seems like it's PSF which is already used by some debian packages i.e. python2.7

I also addressed a couple of Lintian Is including new-package-should-not-package-python2-module, but I still get it for python-jsonref-doc (?)

That should be it !

Paolo

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.maint.python

csiph-web