Hi Nicolas, it was good to meet you in Edinburgh!
On Saturday 09 June 2007 21:57, you wrote:
> >> The package is now named ttf-sil-andika-desrev to better reflect the
> >> design review status, of course it is still very useful at this stage
> >> but we wanted to make that clearer. (When the more complete Andika is
> >> released when can do a rename).
> >
> > Hmmm. This means, they will need to go through NEW twice :-/ Wouldn't it
> > be better (and have the same effect) to note that in the versionnumber
> > and package description?
> OK, so I took your advice: it's better at this stage to keep the initial
> ITP name. Makes it easier for you and the ftp-master team.
ok, cool :)
> The design review status is made clear in the packaging description and
> the changelog.
Great, was that already in ttf-sil-andika-desrev_0.001-2.dsc ?
> Will be putting up the new source package shortly.
:)
Probably not, as my remarks file is from the 28th of may (arrg! sorry for
taking so long...!)
Anyway, those were the remarks I had at that time and against 0.001-2:
- linda+lintian clean, nice
- feedback period is complete (jan 31 2007) but the description or README
mentions it still... (minor, I would still sponsor it like this, but you
should fix it :)
- licence of the packaging? not mentioned in debian/copyright
- version: 0.0.desrev-2007.05.08-2 / ttf-sil-andika - you said above this is
resolved/changed
- control/description mentions authors, debian/copyright doesnt
- AndikaDevRev(A-G).ttf - are those different fonts or different revisions?
I guess the only issue which really blocks sponsoring is the copyright and
naming stuff, the rest would be nice if you could fix/enhance it.
Can you point me to a new source package? If the blocking stuff is fixed, I'll
upload immediatly this time :-)
regards,
Holger (still sorry for taking so long to send this short mail...)
pgpw7znmGvbOC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
