Bug#677935: RFS: cwm/5.1-1 [ITP] -- Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11
Hi Benoît, On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 05:05:50PM +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote: I took a look at your package, here are a few comments: Thanks for your detailed review! Your remarks are very helpful. - lintian reports the following warnings: P: cwm source: unversioned-copyright-format-uri http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5 I: cwm source: debian-watch-file-is-missing P: cwm: no-upstream-changelog P: cwm: no-homepage-field I: cwm: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man5/cwmrc.5.gz:231 I: cwm: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man5/cwmrc.5.gz:245 I have fixed most of these. There is no upstream changelog as there is none provided. I have set the homepage to the github page of the port which is probably the most useful place for a user to find out about it. There isn't an actual site for cwm itself. - In debian/copyright, fgetln.c is licensed under the BSD-2-clause license; and instead of repeating the ISC twice, you could factor it out in its own standalone paragraph. Thanks, I had missed that. I have updated debian/copyright as you suggest. Also, the Source header should not point to one particular version. Use the directory where all the tarballs are stored; but if you got it from github, use that URL instead. Done. The package is indeed based on the tarball release. - In debian/control, why do you depend on dpkg-dev? The package seems to build just fine without it. This was a side-effect of the hardening options in debian/rules. They caused lintian to complain that dpkg-dev was required. It isn't, and this is now fixed. You should also run wrap-and-sort from devscripts to get the Build-Depends field wrapped and sorted. Done. And if you don't use a VCS for your packaging, you should remove those commented-out lines. Done. Your long description repeats information provided by the short description; see [1] for best practices. It could also be expanded a bit. I had in fact just repeated the summary from the manpage. I have read the reference and a few examples and tried to make it more useful. What do you think? [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-pkg-desc - You could use debhelper compat 9, that should take care of the hardening flags for you. Done. As above, this fixed the dpkg-dev problem. It also removed the need for one of the patches. And in debian/rules, you should remove the template comments. Done. - The README doesn't contain useful information for end-users, so you shouldn't install it. Removed. Thanks again for taking the time to review this package. It is appreciated! Cheers, -- James McDonald -- 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/20120626093634.ga13...@postcursor.vm.bytemark.co.uk
Bug#677935: RFS: cwm/5.1-1 [ITP] -- Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11
James McDonald wrote: On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 05:05:50PM +0200, Benoît Knecht wrote: I took a look at your package, here are a few comments: Thanks for your detailed review! Your remarks are very helpful. You're welcome! I'm glad I could help. [...] Your long description repeats information provided by the short description; see [1] for best practices. It could also be expanded a bit. I had in fact just repeated the summary from the manpage. I have read the reference and a few examples and tried to make it more useful. What do you think? Much better in my opinion. I would remove the last sentence of the first paragraph though (about the code that used to come from 9wm), as it doesn't seem very relevant anymore. The package looks pretty good to me now, so I hope you'll find a sponsor soon. But prehaps you should consider Depending on xserver-xorg (or at least Recommend it, if that makes more sense). You could also Suggest xinit, as it seems like a nice way to start such a minimalistic window manager. And here are a couple more nitpickings, if you feel like fixing those: - In debian/control, the debhelper version dependency should simply be = 9 instead of = 9.0.0. - And in the same file, the long description contains a few double-spaces. Cheers, -- Benoît Knecht -- 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/20120626140823.ga6...@marvin.lan
Bug#677935: RFS: cwm/5.1-1 [ITP] -- Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11
Hi James, James McDonald wrote: I am looking for a sponsor for my package cwm * Package name: cwm Version : 5.1-1 Upstream Author : Christian Neukirchen chneukirc...@gmail.com * URL : https://github.com/chneukirchen/cwm * License : ISC Section : x11 It builds those binary packages: cwm - Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11 I took a look at your package, here are a few comments: - lintian reports the following warnings: P: cwm source: unversioned-copyright-format-uri http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep5 I: cwm source: debian-watch-file-is-missing P: cwm: no-upstream-changelog P: cwm: no-homepage-field I: cwm: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man5/cwmrc.5.gz:231 I: cwm: hyphen-used-as-minus-sign usr/share/man/man5/cwmrc.5.gz:245 - In debian/copyright, fgetln.c is licensed under the BSD-2-clause license; and instead of repeating the ISC twice, you could factor it out in its own standalone paragraph. Also, the Source header should not point to one particular version. Use the directory where all the tarballs are stored; but if you got it from github, use that URL instead. - In debian/control, why do you depend on dpkg-dev? The package seems to build just fine without it. You should also run wrap-and-sort from devscripts to get the Build-Depends field wrapped and sorted. And if you don't use a VCS for your packaging, you should remove those commented-out lines. Your long description repeats information provided by the short description; see [1] for best practices. It could also be expanded a bit. [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-pkg-desc - You could use debhelper compat 9, that should take care of the hardening flags for you. And in debian/rules, you should remove the template comments. - The README doesn't contain useful information for end-users, so you shouldn't install it. Cheers, -- Benoît Knecht -- 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/20120625150550.gb27...@marvin.lan
Bug#677935: RFS: cwm/5.1-1 [ITP] -- Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11
Package: sponsorship-requests Severity: wishlist Dear mentors, I am looking for a sponsor for my package cwm * Package name: cwm Version : 5.1-1 Upstream Author : Christian Neukirchen chneukirc...@gmail.com * URL : https://github.com/chneukirchen/cwm * License : ISC Section : x11 It builds those binary packages: cwm - Lightweight and efficient window manager for X11 To access further information about this package, please visit the following URL: http://mentors.debian.net/package/cwm Alternatively, one can download the package with dget using this command: dget -x http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/c/cwm/cwm_5.1-1.dsc More information about cwm can be obtained from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cwm_(window_manager). It is one of the default window managers available in OpenBSD. Changes since the last upload: Initial release (Closes: #505924) Regards, James McDonald -- 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/20120617211012.ga8...@postcursor.vm.bytemark.co.uk
