Bug#732360: Please privide pristine-tar branch
Hi Andreas, Quick update on this: - I have provided the upstream source tarball for v0.5.0, - I have dropped the idea of packaging for Ubuntu for now, so I am now on Debhelper and compat v9, - The package is now lintian-free. Cheers, Ghislain 2014-03-17 12:14 GMT+00:00 Andreas Tille : > Hi Ghislain, > > On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 09:11:12PM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 21:04 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > > I would like to sponsor ismrmrd but there are some issues with the > > > packaging. > > > > > Thank you for stepping-up again to mentor one of my packages. > > Sure, that's fine. I was aware of some "rush" of sponsees when I > started SoB. :-) > > > > 1. The pristine-tar branch is missing. Please use > > > git import-orig --pristine-tar > > > as it is explained in the team policy > > > > > The source distribution is a zip file that certainly needs a repack to a > > suitable tarball format. I have been doing it manually so far. > > Well, but finally you *have* created some orig.tar.gz which is the basis > of your packaging. Specifically if you can not use the download from > upstream you should inject this into Git to make sure we will use the > very same tarball. > > > > 2. Please set the Science team mailing list as Maintainer and > > > yourself as Uploader (as explained in team policy) > > > > > Done > > OK. > > > > 3. If you have good reasons to stick to debhelper compat > > > level 8 please mention them in debian/README.source > > > otherwise please use level 9 > > Reason is that I tested the package on Ubuntu LTS before (personal PPA), > > where setting debhelper to v9 was not possible. > > > > > > The ultimate goal is to have the package accepted in Debian, but > > upstream would also like to support the current Ubuntu LTS. I wanted to > > avoid duplicating my packaging effort, hence some of the choices above. > > If you can suggest better pieces of advice regarding this issue, I'd be > > keen on hearing from them. > > Well, this is somehow a reason. I was not aware that Ubuntu LTS is > lagging behind that much. I do not want to spoil your final target but > in this case you should make sure manually that the test suite will be > run in the build process. In my eyes this is the most important feature > of debhelper compat 9 and I do not really care about the version number > but the functionality of running a test if it is available. So I would > like you to > > 1. Put the paragraph above as explanation for using debhelper 8 in > debian/README.source (just to make sure that we will not forget > and also put the exact LTS version in since the next LTS version > will surely have debhelper 9) > > 2. Make sure the test suite will be run successfully in the build > process. > > BTW, when speaking about the test suite: An autopkgtest control file > would be also a very welcome feature. I think if we are talking about > science we should test our packages as best as possible. > > Kind regards > >Andreas. > > -- > http://fam-tille.de >
Bug#732360: Please privide pristine-tar branch
Hi Ghislain, On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 09:11:12PM +, Ghislain Vaillant wrote: > On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 21:04 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > > I would like to sponsor ismrmrd but there are some issues with the > > packaging. > > > Thank you for stepping-up again to mentor one of my packages. Sure, that's fine. I was aware of some "rush" of sponsees when I started SoB. :-) > > 1. The pristine-tar branch is missing. Please use > > git import-orig --pristine-tar > > as it is explained in the team policy > > > The source distribution is a zip file that certainly needs a repack to a > suitable tarball format. I have been doing it manually so far. Well, but finally you *have* created some orig.tar.gz which is the basis of your packaging. Specifically if you can not use the download from upstream you should inject this into Git to make sure we will use the very same tarball. > > 2. Please set the Science team mailing list as Maintainer and > > yourself as Uploader (as explained in team policy) > > > Done OK. > > 3. If you have good reasons to stick to debhelper compat > > level 8 please mention them in debian/README.source > > otherwise please use level 9 > Reason is that I tested the package on Ubuntu LTS before (personal PPA), > where setting debhelper to v9 was not possible. > > > The ultimate goal is to have the package accepted in Debian, but > upstream would also like to support the current Ubuntu LTS. I wanted to > avoid duplicating my packaging effort, hence some of the choices above. > If you can suggest better pieces of advice regarding this issue, I'd be > keen on hearing from them. Well, this is somehow a reason. I was not aware that Ubuntu LTS is lagging behind that much. I do not want to spoil your final target but in this case you should make sure manually that the test suite will be run in the build process. In my eyes this is the most important feature of debhelper compat 9 and I do not really care about the version number but the functionality of running a test if it is available. So I would like you to 1. Put the paragraph above as explanation for using debhelper 8 in debian/README.source (just to make sure that we will not forget and also put the exact LTS version in since the next LTS version will surely have debhelper 9) 2. Make sure the test suite will be run successfully in the build process. BTW, when speaking about the test suite: An autopkgtest control file would be also a very welcome feature. I think if we are talking about science we should test our packages as best as possible. Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140317121452.gi10...@an3as.eu
Bug#732360: Please privide pristine-tar branch
Hi Andreas, On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 21:04 +0100, Andreas Tille wrote: > Hi Ghislain, > > I would like to sponsor ismrmrd but there are some issues with the > packaging. > Thank you for stepping-up again to mentor one of my packages. > 1. The pristine-tar branch is missing. Please use > git import-orig --pristine-tar > as it is explained in the team policy > The source distribution is a zip file that certainly needs a repack to a suitable tarball format. I have been doing it manually so far. > 2. Please set the Science team mailing list as Maintainer and > yourself as Uploader (as explained in team policy) > Done > 3. If you have good reasons to stick to debhelper compat > level 8 please mention them in debian/README.source > otherwise please use level 9 Reason is that I tested the package on Ubuntu LTS before (personal PPA), where setting debhelper to v9 was not possible. The ultimate goal is to have the package accepted in Debian, but upstream would also like to support the current Ubuntu LTS. I wanted to avoid duplicating my packaging effort, hence some of the choices above. If you can suggest better pieces of advice regarding this issue, I'd be keen on hearing from them. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > Cheers, Ghislain -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1395004272.7513.35.camel@lat644-lap
Bug#732360: Please privide pristine-tar branch
Hi Ghislain, I would like to sponsor ismrmrd but there are some issues with the packaging. 1. The pristine-tar branch is missing. Please use git import-orig --pristine-tar as it is explained in the team policy 2. Please set the Science team mailing list as Maintainer and yourself as Uploader (as explained in team policy) 3. If you have good reasons to stick to debhelper compat level 8 please mention them in debian/README.source otherwise please use level 9 Kind regards Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-wnpp-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140316200409.gb25...@an3as.eu
