This e-mail regards the packaging of the ledger udev rules at https://salsa.debian.org/pkg-security-team/ledger-udev
I'm adding debian-security-tools@lists.debian.org to CC since I don't think I can help any more and I guess Stéphane will need a sponsor soon :) . Hi Stéphane, On Thu, 1 Mar 2018 14:06:13 +0100 Stéphane Neveu <stefne...@gmail.com> wrote: > I see no more warning running lintian -i --pedantic, I also added the > file ledger-udev.metadata.xml for appstream/modalias Great! > Do I still need to keep this upstream/latest branch ? I'm asking as > the package is native now. No, for a native package that branch makes no sense and should be removed. Package looks fine now to me from a technical perspective. Raphaël has already updated the Maintainer and Vcs-* control fields :) . Note that I have never worked on a native package myself, so I might have missed something. A few more things I noticed / I'm unsure about: * The bottom part of the BSD-2-clause license you're using doesn't seem to fit too well: "THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS …". It's just you I guess, no regents. * I would drop the word "simply" from the description (both in your man-page and the xml file). Whether or not adding the udev rules is simple or not is irrelevant for the users :) . * postinst: I'm wondering if the `udevadm` commands are really necessary. My feeling is that since the udev file is installed by dh_installudev and debhelper doesn't insert those rules, they might not be required. Maybe someone here has advise (but be sure to check before dropping the commands; this is really just a feeling). Regards Lukas