RFS: gnome-gmail - Add Gmail support to GNOME
Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gnome-gmail". * Package name : gnome-gmail Version : 1.6-3 Upstream Author : David Steele * URL : http://gnome-gmail.sourceforge.net/ * License : GPL Section : gnome Language : Python It builds these binary packages: gnome-gmail - Add Gmail support to GNOME The package appears to be lintian clean. The upload would fix these bugs: 597903 The package can be found on mentors.debian.net: - URL: http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-gmail/ - Source repository: deb-src http://mentors.debian.net/debian unstable main contrib non-free - dget http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gnome-gmail/gnome-gmail_1.6-3.dsc Gnome Gmail adds support for the Gmail web client as a GNOME Preferred Application for email. Once selected, mailto links, Nautilus "Send File" commands, Open Office "Send Document" commands, etc, will cause an appropriate Gmail window to open in your default browser. You can read more about Gnome Gmail from the following Press coverage: Lifehacker - http://lifehacker.com/5493654/gnome-gmail-tightly-integrates-gmail-into-linux-desktops Linux Magazine Online - http://www.linux-magazine.com/content/view/full/42375 Sourceforge Blog - http://sourceforge.net/blog/gnome-gmail-made-simple/ Thanks for your assistance -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikrktq6ppo0kfoeq2yo4uq4lyozmovf2ruee...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Review of gnome-gmail
Thanks for the review, and the sponsorship offer. I'll work the issues, and continue this offline when it's ready. On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Michael Tautschnig wrote: > Hi Niels, hi list, > > [...] > > > > > Thanks for your interest in Debian. It looks like you have not received > > any feedback on nor found a sponsor for your package yet. I have spent > > some time reviewing your package and got a few comments for you, which I > > hope you find useful. > > > > Please note that I am not a Debian Developer (DD), so I cannot sponsor > > your package even if you address all my comments/remarks. Also neither > > python nor GNOME is my strong suit, so there are possibly some > > python/GNOME specific things that I have missed in my review. > > > > I think this is a prime example of how things could work, ideally. There is > absolutely no need for reviews to be only done by DDs! In fact, I think > there > already was a proposal (I couldn't dig it up in a brief search, though) > that for > each RFS people should do a review of someone else's RFS/package. Again, no > need > to be a DD to do this. All you need a DD for is *sponsoring*. Surely any > sponsor > will not upload the package without doing another brief review, but this > one > will really take a lot less time. > > [...] (very detailed and hopefully helpful review) > > @David: Once all the issues reported by Niels are fixed, I'd offer to do > the > sponsoring. Please ping me via private mail, should I miss your email to > the > list. > > Best regards, > Michael > >
Bug#821151: RFS: comitup/0.1-1 [ITP]
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist thanks Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my new package "comitup" Package name: comitup Version: 0.1 Upstream Author: David Steele URL: https://github.com/davesteele/comitup License: GPL2+ Section: net It builds a single binary package: comitup - bootstrap Wifi using Wifi To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/comitup Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/comitup/comitup_0.1-1.dsc or, using git: git clone https://github.com/davesteele/comitup.git -b debian ./comitup/debian/rules get-orig-source More information about comitup can be obtained from https://github.com/davesteele/comitup/tree/debian ITP is at http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=821145 changelog: comitup (0.1-1) unstable; urgency=low * Initial release (Closes: #821145) -- David Steele Wed, 23 Mar 2016 23:07:38 -0400 Regards, Dave Steele signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#840750: RFS: picocoin/0.1-2.gbp43047g
Expanding on the previous feedback (from a quick review): You should clear all of the non-green issues on the [mentors page]. Note that debuild includes a lintian run. changelog: - The NMU complaint is there because your names in control and changelog don't match. control - You should also populate the Vcs fields in control. This references your Debian repository. rules - There are many who would require you to clear out the comments in that file. copyright - The ftp masters pay particularly close attention to the copyright file of packages in the NEW queue. Yours has an error in it (missing License line in the claim paragraph). It also is missing references to third party Copyright claims in the source tree, and to your files in the debian directory. Do a careful search of copyright claims, and make sure all are documented. - "The MIT License (MIT)" (exact text) is not on the 'official' list. See the [license list], referenced from the [copyright file spec]. The one you are looking for is probably 'Expat', though you should verify the text carefully. [mentors page]: https://mentors.debian.net/package/picocoin [license list]: https://spdx.org/licenses/ [copyright files spec]: https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/ You can upload again to mentors when complete. Update the revision, and mark previous revisions as "UNRELEASED" (that may just be my personal preference). -- "Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien" - Voltaire signature.asc Description: GooPG digital signature
Bug#843126: RFS: freight/0.3.9-2 [ITP] -- easy-to-understand shell scripts to handle APT repositories
First off, thanks for doing the work of preparing this package for Debian. I'd also like to apologize for the long wait you've endured, and the lost opportunity for Stretch inclusion. Your packaging is in pretty good shape. I have some comments based on a review, detailing the changes I would like to see before uploading. First, a couple of things which are not your fault - debhelper/compat should be 10 now, and there is a newer upstream version released. When you add the new version, set the older changelog entry to UNRELEASED. The source tar you uploaded does not match upstream. I did not investigate why. One thing I very much like to see is a get-orig-source target in rules. It is a good way to ensure that the correct source tar is always included, and is close to plug-and-chug with the instructions on the wiki page: https://wiki.debian.org/onlyjob/get-orig-source I'd also like to see an /etc/freight.conf installed, defining the defaults and providing an obvious location to modify them. As an aside, when I first looked at freight, I was intrigued by the prospect of managing repos with no config file (-c /dev/null). Params are defined as shell variables, and there are only about three that I care about. Life would be simpler if I could just define the variables and call the freight commands from the same script. Alas, it is not coded to support that right now. The package needs to work properly out of the box. That means ensuring that the default VARLIB and VARCACHE default directories are established and created as a part of the install. I'm not going to put my secret key under root - there needs to be a standard way to run as a normal user, perhaps by establishing a group with the necessary default permissions, and a clear message from freight-add telling the user how to get the proper access. So, create a freight user and group, make the group able to work in the default directories, and prompt the user with the proper usermod command if write access fails on those directories. Note that users are established using installation scripts, and that any user created in an installation script is never deleted by same. Both your deb and the deb from the upstream homepage failed for me in chmod pubring.gpg. The work directory did not exist. I commented out all actions on pubring to continue. I don't recall if freight-cache announces the repo directory on completion. It should. The FTP Masters are sticklers for the copyright file. Yours captures everything from the source, but also includes "The Freight Team", with no indication of how it is claimed upstream. I don't know if that will cause problems or not. Minor stuff This is minor (i.e. not required by me), but the lib scripts should be in /usr/share/freight. http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3.html#USRSHAREARCHITECTUREINDEPENDENTDATA Bash completion installation? I promise a shorter wait next time. -- AE0D BF5A 92A5 ADE4 9481 BA6F 8A31 71EF 3661 50CE signature.asc Description: GooPG digital signature
Bug#843126: Man pages
As I've been playing with freight, I am noticing that the man pages are in need of updating. -- AE0D BF5A 92A5 ADE4 9481 BA6F 8A31 71EF 3661 50CE
Bug#840750: RFS: picocoin/0.1-2.gbp43047g
On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Joel DeJesus wrote: > I have uploaded a new source package to fix some of the smaller issues > with the control files, copyrights, etc. However, I seem to be stuck at > what to do with the library name, libccoin. > > I was planning on just have libccoin as the package name and just > managing the soname with the proper Makefile.am files. However, > according to the "package-name-doesnt-match-sonames", I will need to > rename the package to libccoin0. > > Is it better for me to just change the name to libccoin0? Take a look at what the policy says. https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html > > As for the dependencies, I will have to learn how to use pbuilder under > git-buildpackage and try to submit another source package. git-buildpackage is useful, but complicated first time out, and not necessary for this. https://pbuilder.alioth.debian.org/ If you are using gbp, put the config file in the debian folder.See "builder=git-pbuilder".
Bug#840750: Availability for picocoin RFS
First, I want to apologize for the latest delay in responding. I remember being on the waiting side of things, and am sorry I'm contributing to the problem. Second, I want to let you know that I won't be able to get to this, for at least till the end of summer. If someone else picks up sponsorship, that would be great. Otherwise, I'll check in after August. -- AE0D BF5A 92A5 ADE4 9481 BA6F 8A31 71EF 3661 50CE signature.asc Description: GooPG digital signature
Bug#878741: Bug#857042: thonny packaging status
On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Aivar Annamaa wrote: > Dominik George from Debian Edu team agreed to sponsor my package once I > get accepted to Edu team and fix the package problems. > > Should I update the RFS somehow to reflect this? > > > We just did :-) Good luck. I'm looking forward to using it.
