Hey! - d/changelog: do you have any contact with Bjoern Buerger, the original author of the ITP?
- d/control: the list in Maintainers will receive bug reports and stuff
related to the lifecycle of the package. Is that your intent?
- d/control: remove comments.
- d/control: Vcs-* fields are for packaging. There is not issue to
share upstream Git for that, but this means you should have some
branch dedicated for Debian packaging (like "debian") who is based on
the tag you are currently packaging (and when you update the upstream
version, you merge master in this branch). Then, you can point
Vcs-Browser to the branch, as well as Vcs-Git (with "-b debian")
- d/control: short description should not start with a capital
- d/control: jool-tools should depend or recommend iptables | nftables
(I think)
- d/copyright: as upstream, you should either put the expected
copyright notice in each source file (as explained in the license) or
put it in a LICENSE file. I say that mostly because just the content
of COPYING makes it difficult to know if it is licensed as GPL-2 or
GPL-2 or a later version. The package may be rejected because of this
issue when uploaded to Debian. To not release a new tarball just with
that, you can clarify the situation in a "Comment" field.
- d/jool-dkms.install: this shouldn't be a shell script
- d/*.service: I think you should remove the comments. I understand
this is a log of what you have considered, but it makes the file
quite hard to read.
- d/*.service: by policy, we still have to support SysV init scripts.
This is currently disputed but this is still a policy violation and
as is, I think the package will be rejected. You can either provide a
SysV init script (which is a pain) or override Lintian for
package-supports-alternative-init-but-no-init.d-script with some
comment in the override. As arguments, you can say jool is
Linux-only, that you have no system running SysV init to test the
init script. Alternatively, you can ship without the service files,
wait for the package to be accepted in Debian and then add back the
service files. I would do that.
- d/*.service: from my understanding, it seems that if you are
installing jool, you install configuration files at the target
location and the service will configure jool to start. However,
configuration files are mostly examples. If you cannot provide a
configuration that will work for most users, it would be better to
declare the configuration files as example (put them in
jools-tools.example) and add a
ConditionPathExists=/etc/jool/jool.conf to the service file).
- d/rules: ok, I didn't see you did address the previous issue here. I
still think the ConditionPathExists stuff is better as disabled
services are not common in Debian. But it's up to you.
Overall, the package looks pretty good!
--
The naked truth of it is, I have no shirt.
-- William Shakespeare, "Love's Labour's Lost"
――――――― Original Message ―――――――
From: Alberto Leiva <ydah...@gmail.com>
Sent: 12 juillet 2019 17:46 -05
Subject: Re:
To: 883393; bernat
> Looking for a sponsor...
> https://mentors.debian.net/package/jool
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 1:22 PM Alberto Leiva <ydah...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello. upstream author (and perhaps future upstream maintainer as well)
>> > here.
>>
>> Derp. I meant "Hello. Upstream author, upstream maintainer, and
>> (perhaps) future package maintainer as well here."
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
