Re: New package python-instagram

2014-11-21 Thread Etienne Millon
* Jörg Frings-Fürst deb...@jff-webhosting.net [141121 08:43]:
 Hello,
 
 I have uploaded a new package to mentors[1..3]: python-instagram.
 
 Please can someone reviewe the package?
 
 Many thanks.

Hi,

The package seems fine (builds ok, lintian happy, idiomatic pybuild
etc). Although I am not a DD and cannot sponsor it, I have a few
remarks:

  - it's simpler if your packaging has the same license as he upstream
code. Here in particular your license (GPL3) is less permissive
than upstream's (BSD3) so it can causes problems I guess.

  - debian/python{,3}-instagram.{docs,examples} have trailing empty
lines.

  - to get the version from debian/rules I'd suggest using something
like dpkg-parsechangelog|grep ^Version|cut -d' '  -f2

  - to make the orig tarball, couldn't you use
https://github.com/Instagram/python-instagram/archive/master.tar.gz
and a Files-Excluded? That would require a different logic to
generate the upstream changelog but would make the repacking
logic way easier to read.

  - is notneededdir/unwantedfiles.* needed ?

I hope you will find a sponsor. Thanks for your hard work!

-- 
Etienne Millon


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141121083649.GA3083@klow



Re: New package python-instagram

2014-11-21 Thread Etienne Millon
* Etienne Millon m...@emillon.org [141121 09:36]:
   - to make the orig tarball, couldn't you use
 https://github.com/Instagram/python-instagram/archive/master.tar.gz
 and a Files-Excluded? That would require a different logic to
 generate the upstream changelog but would make the repacking
 logic way easier to read.

To expand on this: instead of using master, you can mangle the git
version and download archive/$(COMMIT).tar.gz.

-- 
Etienne Millon


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141121083942.GB3083@klow



Re: New package python-instagram

2014-11-21 Thread Jörg Frings-Fürst
Hello Etienne,

first thanks for your review.


Am Freitag, den 21.11.2014, 09:36 +0100 schrieb Etienne Millon:
 * Jörg Frings-Fürst deb...@jff-webhosting.net [141121 08:43]:
  Hello,
  
  I have uploaded a new package to mentors[1..3]: python-instagram.
  
  Please can someone reviewe the package?
  
  Many thanks.
 
 Hi,
 
 The package seems fine (builds ok, lintian happy, idiomatic pybuild
 etc). Although I am not a DD and cannot sponsor it, I have a few
 remarks:
 
   - it's simpler if your packaging has the same license as he upstream
 code. Here in particular your license (GPL3) is less permissive
 than upstream's (BSD3) so it can causes problems I guess.

I always use GLP-3+ for debian/* and set the license of debian/patches/*
to the license of the source file(s). So I don't see any problems.

 
   - debian/python{,3}-instagram.{docs,examples} have trailing empty
 lines.
 

Removed. 

   - to get the version from debian/rules I'd suggest using something
 like dpkg-parsechangelog|grep ^Version|cut -d' '  -f2

I will test it.

 
   - to make the orig tarball, couldn't you use
 https://github.com/Instagram/python-instagram/archive/master.tar.gz
 and a Files-Excluded? That would require a different logic to
 generate the upstream changelog but would make the repacking
 logic way easier to read.

I need the commit ID for the version. All tips to get the ID are only
working with a local repository. I know that my scripts are not optimal,
but they works. 

 
   - is notneededdir/unwantedfiles.* needed ?
 

Removed.

 I hope you will find a sponsor. Thanks for your hard work!
 
 -- 
 Etienne Millon
 
 


CU
Jörg

-- 
pgp Fingerprint: 7D13 3C60 0A10 DBE1 51F8  EBCB 422B 44B0 BE58 1B6E
pgp Key: BE581B6E
CAcert Key S/N: 0E:D4:56

Jörg Frings-Fürst
D-54526 Niederkail

Threema: SYR8SJXB

IRC: j_...@freenode.net
 j_...@oftc.net


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Re: New package python-instagram

2014-11-21 Thread Elena ``of Valhalla''
On 2014-11-21 at 12:33:58 +0100, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
- it's simpler if your packaging has the same license as he upstream
  code. Here in particular your license (GPL3) is less permissive
  than upstream's (BSD3) so it can causes problems I guess.
 
 I always use GLP-3+ for debian/* and set the license of debian/patches/*
 to the license of the source file(s). So I don't see any problems.

Wouldn't that means that the debian package can only be distributed/used 
under GPL-3+, and thus e.g. a library can't be linked from / used 
in something with a noncompatible license (including GPL-2), even if 
the upstream program allowed it?

(Assuming that there is something copyrightable in debian/ minus
debian/patches/, and for other packages that the upstream license 
was compatible with GPL-3+ in the first place)

-- 
Elena ``of Valhalla''


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-python-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/20141121121448.ga8...@virginsteele.home.trueelena.org



Re: New package python-instagram

2014-11-21 Thread Jörg Frings-Fürst
Hello Elena,

thanks for your comments.

Am Freitag, den 21.11.2014, 13:14 +0100 schrieb Elena ``of Valhalla'':
 On 2014-11-21 at 12:33:58 +0100, Jörg Frings-Fürst wrote:
 - it's simpler if your packaging has the same license as he upstream
   code. Here in particular your license (GPL3) is less permissive
   than upstream's (BSD3) so it can causes problems I guess.
  
  I always use GLP-3+ for debian/* and set the license of debian/patches/*
  to the license of the source file(s). So I don't see any problems.
 
 Wouldn't that means that the debian package can only be distributed/used 
 under GPL-3+, and thus e.g. a library can't be linked from / used 
 in something with a noncompatible license (including GPL-2), even if 
 the upstream program allowed it?
 
 (Assuming that there is something copyrightable in debian/ minus
 debian/patches/, and for other packages that the upstream license 
 was compatible with GPL-3+ in the first place)
 

I think not. The same issue I had some times ago on d-mentors[1][2].


 -- 
 Elena ``of Valhalla''
 
 

CU
Jörg


[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2014/09/msg00631.html
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2014/10/msg0.html

-- 
pgp Fingerprint: 7D13 3C60 0A10 DBE1 51F8  EBCB 422B 44B0 BE58 1B6E
pgp Key: BE581B6E
CAcert Key S/N: 0E:D4:56

Jörg Frings-Fürst
D-54526 Niederkail

Threema: SYR8SJXB

IRC: j_...@freenode.net
 j_...@oftc.net


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part