Matthew, I just built your package on sarge, it went fine. Good job. python2.4-pylucene_1.9-1_i386.deb
I noticed you chose not to have a README.Debian file. That's probably ok, since most of the weirdness affects package maintainers and not package users. On the other hand, you might want to create one and include a link to this conversation (bug 256283) in case the end user is wondering why the heck it isn't included in Debian proper. Your call. Andi, how about distributing the binary package (.deb) from the PyLucene website while things are shaking out? Or perhaps Matthew can distribute from canonical.org, and have a link from the PyLucene homepage? This can be done immediately, allows Debian sarge users to try out the package and provide feedback, and will make a few people's lives a little easier. I can't think of any disadvantages. Matthew, I think your list of open issues is spot-on. One good thing about item #3 (building Java Lucene 1.9 with a Free Software toolchain) is this goal is shared by the folks who package Java Lucene. That's Barry, myself, and other members of the Java packaging team. I can assure you there will be no lack of motivation and manpower for the task if Eclipse ever starts depending on Java Lucene 1.9. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=272295 Cheers, Jeff