Hi Leo, 2014-04-18 16:03 GMT+02:00 Leo Iannacone <l...@ubuntu.com>: > Hi all, > > someone could sponsor me this package: > > http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/should.js.git
A few remarks: - d/watch: have you thought about using Debian's Github redir service [0]? [0] http://githubredir.debian.net/ - d/rules: why override_dh_auto_test? Can't the tests in Makefile be run? It seems mildly strange to not run the test provided with a software who has a goal to "keeps your test code clean" ;) - d/copyright: not a big issue, but you realize that licensing your changes under GPL-3 while the library is Expat-licensed, any changes or future patches you make can't go back upstream? If that's a conscious decision, that's fine, otherwise you could consider licensing your package same-as-upstream. - Is node-should.lintian-overrides strictly needed, or is it indeed containing an external library that you should rather depend on? In particular, what is lib/browser/ext/jquery.js since it doesn't look like a full copy of jQuery? - Regarding your latest commit 719083c "do not install should.min.js - agreed with debian-js team": this is a long discussion, the short version is that you should repackage the upstream tarball to remove the included .min.js file, and can (not forced, but nice to the end user) recreate the minified js file using uglifyjs (which you apparently added in dff2125d9f and reverted in 71c32aa01e4. Why?) [NOTE TO THE TEAM: who can update the team's policy page to make the repackaging policy clear? It's not efficient to re-discuss this topic for each new package ;)] - You could add the History.md file as a changelog - Can examples/runner.js be included as an example? Except for the repackaging, package overall looks good. +Emilien _______________________________________________ Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list Pkg-javascript-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-javascript-devel