Re: Proposed new package, bugs-everywhere_0.0.193-1.1
Ben Finney wrote: > Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> - strange to see there's only a © 2005 copyright line, IIRC the project >>has been quite active lately. But still IIRC you're more versed into >>legalese than I am, so you probably told them to update their >>copyright notices. Hmm, and a quick grep shows that you're missing at >>least: ./libbe/hg.py:# Copyright (C) 2007 Steve Borho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Good catch. I'll have to gather the copyright notices properly from > the whole tree. Have a look at `licensecheck -R *` (in case you haven't yet), very useful script for these purposes. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: pyblock
Hi Miguelangel,
Miguelangel Jose Freitas Loreto wrote:
> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "pyblock".
I'm not a DD, but my AM will upload the package if/when it's fine, so I've
reviewed it.
You don't need to edit the Makefile in the diff.gz, instead you can remove
COPYING and the dir in the binary-post-install target in debian/rules.
Since you're using python-central, you don't need to build-depend on
python-support (or if you decide to use python-support, remove python-central
from the build-dependencies).
Standards-Version is outdated, 3.8.1 is the latest.
The homepage doesn't really look like a homepage :) but I can't find one...
The binary package should be named python-block (i.e. you prefix the name of the
python module with 'python-', in this case the module is block).
You must build the module for all the supported python versions
A couple of lintian tags:
I: pyblock source: debian-watch-file-is-missing
I: python-pyblock: extended-description-is-probably-too-short
emi...@saturno:~$ python -c 'import block'
dm.c: 1585: not running as root returning empty list
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "", line 1, in
File "/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/block/__init__.py", line 50, in
from bdevid import bdevid as _bdevid
ImportError: No module named bdevid
emi...@saturno:~$
Looks like we need libbdevid, which is not in Debian...
emi...@saturno:~/tmp/pyblock-0.36$ grep bdevid python-pyblock.spec
BuildRequires: zlib-devel, libbdevid >= 5.1.0
Requires: libbdevid, libbdevid-python, dmraid-libs >= %{dmrver}
In debian/copyright you say the sources are GPL2+, but it looks like they are
"GPL2 | GPL3" to me.
Cheers,
Emilio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: parcellite (updated package)
Hi Andrew, Andrew wrote: > According to the mentors page, five people have downloaded the > package. If any of you have comments, I'd love the feedback. The update looks fine to me. I have a few comments though: You could add a Vcs-Browser field too. There are a few lintian tags (only the first one is a warning, but you should bump the changelog date before requesting sponsorship, e.g. do `dch -r`): W: parcellite source: timewarp-standards-version (2009-02-06 < 2009-03-12) I: parcellite source: quilt-patch-missing-description 01_fix_man_page.patch I: parcellite source: quilt-patch-missing-description 02_remove_desktopfile_encoding.patch I: parcellite: extended-description-is-probably-too-short Have you forwarded the patches upstream? They are quite trivial, so I'd expect them to apply them right away. Also, there is a new Copyright holder, the FSF, for po/sv.po Otherwise it looks fine to me. Cheers, Emilio signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: RFS: arc-colors, gnome-colors, shiki-colors
Evgeni Golov wrote: > On Thu, 7 May 2009 01:41:01 +0200 Evgeni Golov wrote: > >> + grep -ri licen gnome-*/* |grep -vi "GPL/2.0" |grep -vi "cc:license" >>is interesting too, it lists LGPL and CC-BY-SA-2.0 and 2.5 too. >>And also CC-BY-NC-3.0 too - this is non-free! :( > > Ew, forgot to mention that CC-*-1.x and 2.x are considered non-free > too :( Although for 2.x you can distribute derivative works under a later version of the license (e.g. 3.0), so if we considerate Debian packaging a derivative work, that would be fine. I seem to recall there is stuff in the archive that is licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.5, probably due to the above reasoning. Best, Emilio signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: NMU upload for gdesklets
Hey, zufus wrote: > Hi, > > there is a sonsoring request for an NMU on gdesklets: > > http://mentors.debian.net/cgi-bin/sponsor-pkglist?action=details;package=gdesklets > > I was wondering if is it OK to upload it as it fixes an RC bug (in case, > I can sponsor the upload) or if there are some work in progress on this > package, and in this case, it might be better to wait (for example to > fix some of the 168 lintian warnings). I'll upload an MU as soon as python2.5 is installable again, and look at the lintian output. If you want to work on the package or fix some issues, let me know. Cheers, Emilio signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: NMU upload for gdesklets
Marco Presi wrote: > I'll try to fix the lintians. I'll update you. > > Btw, are going to take care of this package? I don't care for it myself, but I think Deng does (or maybe other team members). Emilio signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Bug#748591: RFS: gtkspellmm/3.0.3+dfsg-1 [ITP]
On 20/05/14 01:38, Vincent Cheng wrote: > Hi Philip, > > On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 10:07 AM, Philip Rinn wrote: >> Package: sponsorship-requests >> Severity: wishlist >> >> Dear mentors, >> >> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "gtkspellmm". This package is a >> dependency of gimagereader, a GTK front-end for tesseract-ocr, which I also >> package. >> >> * Package name: gtkspellmm >>Version : 3.0.3+dfsg-1 >>Upstream Author : Sandro Mani >> * URL : http://gtkspell.sourceforge.net >> * License : GPL2+ >>Section : libs >> >> It builds those binary packages: >> >> libgtkspellmm-3.0-0 - C++ wrapper library for GtkSpell (shared libraries) >> libgtkspellmm-3.0-dev - C++ wrapper library for GtkSpell (development >> files) >> libgtkspellmm-3.0-doc - C++ wrappers for GtkSpell (documentation) >> >> To access further information about this package, please visit the >> following >> URL: >> >> http://mentors.debian.net/package/gtkspellmm >> >> >> Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: >> >> dget -x >> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/g/gtkspellmm/gtkspellmm_3.0.3+dfsg-1.dsc >> >> There is also a git repository in collab-maint: >> >> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/gtkspellmm.git;a=summary >> >> >> The package is Lintian clean but as it's my first library I'd be happy to get >> some feedback. >> > > Have you tried contacting the Debian GNOME team [1] (which maintains > similar packages [2]) to see if anyone might be interested in your > package? It's generally a lot easier to find willing sponsors and get > your package reviewed if you maintain your package in a team. I wouldn't mind having this in pkg-gnome. That way you could get somebody from the team to sponsor uploads, plus you could help with the other C++ bindings ;) But this is up to you, you can keep the package in collab-maint. BTW if you haven't found a sponsor yet I'll be happy to take a look at it. Just let me know. Cheers, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/537c5a64.3000...@debian.org
Bug#748591: RFS: gtkspellmm/3.0.3+dfsg-1 [ITP]
On 20/08/14 21:27, Eriberto Mota wrote: > 2014-08-20 13:50 GMT-03:00 Philip Rinn : >> Hi Eriberto, hi Emilio, >> >> both of you offered to sponsor gtkspellmm, thanks for that. >> As Eriberto already sponsored my gimagereader upload I'd be glad if the >> upload of >> gtkspellmm would not be delayed to long. Saying that I want to prevent that >> both >> of you do the reviewing work - I guess you have more than enough to do. >> Probably >> one of you could just should when he is starting the review? > > > Hi Philip and Emilio, > > I will start the review. Emilio, feel free to request the package, if > you want sponsor it. No, I'm terribly busy, so that's fine. Thanks, Emilio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-mentors-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53f4fa6e.6030...@debian.org
Bug#834322: RFS: phatch/0.2.7.1-3.2 [NMU] [RC]
On 16/08/16 12:15, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: > Hi, > >> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "phatch" >> Changes since the last upload: >> >> * Non-maintainer upload. >> * debian/patches: >> + Add fix-loading.patch to fix load with latest version of >> python-imaging > >> and python-pil. (Closes: #811184, LP: #1567827) > this looks good to me > > >> * Drop debian/phatch.menu> * debian/control: >> + Use secured links for VCS. >> + Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.8. (no changes needed) >> * Drop debian/phatch.lintian: it is useless. > > > usually out of an NMU scope, but since the package is team maintained, I think > we can also get them in, with a cc of the maintainers in this email > (note: I sponsored in deferred/15, please Emilio or Piotr ack the changes!) > > thanks for the nice contribution to Debian, and for bringing the package back > into a good shape :) Ack, thanks! Feel free to directly upload this. Bonus points if you commit the changes to the repo. Thanks, Emilio
Bug#834322: RFS: phatch/0.2.7.1-3.2 [NMU] [RC]
On 25/08/16 12:04, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: > On 16/08/16 12:15, Gianfranco Costamagna wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> I am looking for a sponsor for my package "phatch" >>> Changes since the last upload: >>> >>> * Non-maintainer upload. >>> * debian/patches: >>> + Add fix-loading.patch to fix load with latest version of >>> python-imaging >> >>> and python-pil. (Closes: #811184, LP: #1567827) >> this looks good to me >> >> >>> * Drop debian/phatch.menu> * debian/control: >>> + Use secured links for VCS. >>> + Bump Standards-Version to 3.9.8. (no changes needed) >>> * Drop debian/phatch.lintian: it is useless. >> >> >> usually out of an NMU scope, but since the package is team maintained, I >> think >> we can also get them in, with a cc of the maintainers in this email >> (note: I sponsored in deferred/15, please Emilio or Piotr ack the changes!) >> >> thanks for the nice contribution to Debian, and for bringing the package back >> into a good shape :) > > Ack, thanks! Feel free to directly upload this. Bonus points if you commit the > changes to the repo. I should have read all the thread before replying :P Emilio
Bug#856603: RFS: arc-theme/20170302-1
On 03/03/17 06:20, Adam Borowski wrote: > 3.22.9-1 is a whole new upstream release, with changes that actively break > unrelated packages. As you just mentioned, it does at least require themes > to be updated, and, as usual for GTK 3 new releases, probably a bunch of > gtk-3 using programs as well. That's not usual for point releases, in this case a bad change slipped through. That has been fixed in 3.22.9-3. > Then there's 3.22.9-2 which is a targetted RC bug fix... atop of bad > 3.22.9-1 rather than testing's 3.22.8-1. Ie, exactly the reason why > uploading random changes to unstable during freeze is a bad idea. > > I see that gtk+3.0's maintainers will need to make a separate upload to > testing-proposed-updates with a 3.22.8-2. That bug was introduced in 3.22.9, it doesn't affect 3.22.8. So no, nothing needs to go through tpu. BTW thanks for the notice about this regression. Cheers, Emilio
Bug#953803: RFS: xdg-utils/1.1.3-2 -- desktop integration utilities from freedesktop.org
Hi Nicholas, On 13/03/2020 18:20, Nicholas Guriev wrote: > Package: sponsorship-requests > Severity: normal > X-Debbugs-CC: pkg-freedesktop-maintain...@lists.alioth.debian.org > Control: block 652038 by -1 > Control: block 908760 by -1 > Control: block 910070 by -1 > > Dear mentors, > > I am looking for a sponsor for my package "xdg-utils" I would sponsor this, but I don't like that you patched the upstream scripts directly without using a patch system. That will make it harder to merge newer upstream versions (due to conflicts). If you change that and use proper patches (ideally git-format'ted ones when coming from upstream), I will happily sponsor this. Cheers, Emilio
