Hi Ian,
Sorry for the confusion. Of course n-m-s is not in salsa (yet). I was
working on mg (my other package) in parallel, which *is* in salsa.
On 2/24/20 3:02 PM, Ian Jackson wrote:
I looked at the diff etc. and I have some observations:
* It would be nice to add a Vcs-Git header.
I am OK with this, but I would suggest to wait for the move to salsa,
see below.
* I noticed you changed the Build-Depends. There is a change to
debhelper, which is expected. But there are also changes to the
network-manager build-dependencies. I looked for some file in
upstream wqher etehse requirements are documented, and/or something
in the debian/changelog to explain or document the change, but
found nothing. Can you please explain ?
The version numbers of the dependencies have been changed according to
the packages found in Buster. I didn't feel confident with the old Network
Manager version numbers. n-m-s 1.4.5-1 has never been built or tested
with these anicient versions. Sorry, I forgot to mention it in the
changelog.
* Please can you consider providing an explanation of the patch
glib-private.patch *inside* that patch file. (Ideally patches
should be in git-format-patch format or or DEP-3 format.)
About glib-private.patch: I am not quite sure what you mean. I don't
see a nested patch, just debian/patches/glib-private.patch. Apparently
it *is* in git format.
None of these observations look like blockers to me but I would like
to at least ask you for answers before I just upload it.
More on administrativia:
* Since you have already committed your finalised 1.4.5-1 version, it
would be best not to make more commits before bumping the changelog
version again. So, if in response to this review you would like to
make changes, rather than give explanations, please use 1.4.5-2 for
your next revision.
Sorry about that. Since nobody except you knows the current git repo
for n-m-s, do you think it would be possible to delete the unwanted
signed tag, using
git push --delete origin tagName
?
* In future, I am very happy to sponsor directly from git, especially
from salsa. I see we have pristine tar and everything. So just
push your branch (including pristine-tar) to salsa and email me.
There is no need for you to make a dsc and email me attachments.
In my review above I ignored your attachments and just worked with
the git branch (from your private server).
It would be nice to start with 1.4.5-1 on salsa. But AFAIK I need a
sponsor (somebody with a full functional account) for either creating a
repo for an official Debian package, or for getting a real account.
Currently, if I try to create a project, then it gets a funny looking
URL
https://salsa.debian.org/harri-guest/
instead of the expected
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/network-manager-strongswan
:-(
* Indeed, there is no need for you to make a signed tag. Because
salsa is access controlled I feel I can trust it enough for this, at
least as a baseline for review. If you like, feel free to leave the
changelog as UNRELEASED; I am happy to do that change to `unstable'
as part of the upload and push to salsa. If you would like to work
this way, please give user `iwj' access to the repo.
I am not sure about the UNRELEASED. Usually I push the package to my
own repositories run by reprepro. It doesn't like the UNRELEASED.
* If it's OK with you I like doing reviews in public. I think a "new
upstream version" bug against the package is a good place because it
means that if either of us drops it, our work is easily available as
a starting point for others.
Thats fine with me.
Regards
Harri
