* Thomas Kluyver <tho...@kluyver.me.uk>, 2012-03-25, 00:38:
Apart from the fact the license and copyright status of the file is
not documented in debian/copyright, there's another problem: the
tarball appears to be a collection of binary blobs, for which we have
no source.
I'm afraid that you'll have to either ask upstream to include the
actual source for zoneinfo or repack the source.
I know Debian is stringent about these things, but is this really
necessary?
I believe so.
We're not even using the file, and upstream says where the
files are from (see
http://labix.org/python-dateutil#head-7b64fa6ed6e02b68e9cb7c3d42d6fb7b4cb133e9).
The Python 2 version has already been accepted in Debian with an
equivalent (slightly older) file.
Well, ftp-masters aren't infallible. I've just filed RC bug against
python-dateutils: http://bugs.debian.org/665894
I wonder if bug #597098 should be merged with your ITP.
--
Jakub Wilk
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120326202816.ga...@jwilk.net
