You are correct, my bad. I'll remember going forward. -rt
On May 4, 2026 5:54:48 AM EDT, Aryan Karamtoth <[email protected]> wrote: > >On 04/05/26 07:01, [email protected] wrote: >> The Debian NEW review of fingwit 1.0.8+ds-1 has been completed. >> >> Decision: REJECTED >> Reviewer: Reinhard Tartler >> >> Review comment: >> >> Thanks for your diligence while working on this package. I've had a >> look through the source, and while it's mostly there, I have to reject >> it for now because of a few issues in the copyright and control files. >> >> The `Files: *` stanza in `debian/copyright` contains a typo at the end >> of the `Copyright` field: `2021-2026 Linux Mint >> <[email protected]>t:`. Also, the full license text provided for >> `GPL-3` is actually the boilerplate for GPL-2 or later. Since the >> package is claimed as GPL-3 and the `LICENSE` file is GPL-3, you should >> use the correct GPL-3 boilerplate or simply refer to the common license >> file. >> >> Furthermore, the `Source` stanza in `debian/control` is missing the >> `Priority` field (it should be `optional`), and the `Section` should >> probably be `admin` or `utils` instead of `misc`. Finally, there is a >> trailing space in the `po/*` stanza of `debian/copyright`, and the >> description for `libpam-fingwit` has inconsistent indentation for its >> bullet points. >> >> -rt >> >> Full review details: https://dfsg-new-queue.debian.org/reviews/fingwit > >Hi Reinhard > >Wasn't priority field made non mandatory since Debian Policy version 4.7.3? > >[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2025/12/msg00005.html >
