Details about package utfcpp
| Name: | utfcpp (PTS) |
|---|---|
| Uploader: | Syed Shahrukh Hussain <syed.shahrukh@ossrevival.org> (Debian QA page) |
| Description: | libutfcpp-dev - UTF8-CPP: UTF-8 with C++ - dev libutfcpp-doc - UTF8-CPP: UTF-8 with C++ - documentation |
Package uploads
Upload #2
Information
| Version: | 4.0.8-1 |
|---|---|
| Uploaded: | 2025-11-11 13:12 |
| Source package: | utfcpp_4.0.8-1.dsc |
| Distribution: | unstable |
| Section: | libdevel |
| Priority: | optional |
| Homepage: | https://github.com/nemtrif/utfcpp |
| Vcs-Git: | https://salsa.debian.org/debian/utfcpp.git |
| Vcs-Browser: | https://salsa.debian.org/debian/utfcpp |
| Closes bugs: | #1065736 |
Changelog
utfcpp (4.0.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * New upstream version 4.0.8. * Adopt package (Closes:#1065736). * debian/copyright: add myself to debian/* copyright. * debian/patches/0003-*: add Forwarded: not-needed. * debian/tests: rename run_sample to run-sample to fix lintian warning. * Bump Standards-Version to 4.7.2 (no changes needed). * Update d/watch file format to version 5. * Added d/gbp.conf
QA information
-
–
Package uses debhelper-compatDebhelper compatibility level 13
-
–
A watch file is present but doesn't work
Warnings: debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Version: 5
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Template: Github
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Owner: nemtrif
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Project: utfcpp -
–
Package is not native
Format: 3.0 (quilt) -
–
"Maintainer" email is the same as the uploader
-
–
Package has lintian warningsutfcpp source
-
W
missing-debian-watch-file-standard
- [debian/watch]
-
X
very-long-line-length-in-source-file
- 553 > 512 [README.md:269]
-
W
missing-debian-watch-file-standard
-
–
Package closes ITA bug
-
–
Package is already in Debian
- The package uploader is not currently maintaining utfcpp in Debian
- Last upload was on the 2025-11-09
-
–
d/copyright is in DEP5 format
Upstream Contact: Nemanja Trifunovic Licenses: BSL-1.0
Comments
No comments
Upload #1
Information
| Version: | 4.0.8-1 |
|---|---|
| Uploaded: | 2025-11-04 10:42 |
| Source package: | utfcpp_4.0.8-1.dsc |
| Distribution: | unstable |
| Section: | libdevel |
| Priority: | optional |
| Homepage: | https://github.com/nemtrif/utfcpp |
| Vcs-Git: | https://salsa.debian.org/debian/utfcpp.git |
| Vcs-Browser: | https://salsa.debian.org/debian/utfcpp |
| Closes bugs: | #1065736 |
Changelog
utfcpp (4.0.8-1) unstable; urgency=medium . * Adopt package (Closes:#1065736). * Change from experimental to unstable for new upstream version 4.0.8 * Declare compliance with Debian Policy 4.7.2 * Update d/watch file format to version 5. * Added d/gbp.conf * Renamed autopkgtest to fix lintian warning.
QA information
-
–
Package uses debhelper-compatDebhelper compatibility level 13
-
–
A watch file is present but doesn't work
Warnings: debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
debian/watch is an obsolete version 1 watch file;
please upgrade to a higher version
(see uscan(1) for details).
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Version: 5
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Template: Github
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Owner: nemtrif
there appears to be a version 2 format line in
the version 1 watch file debian/watch;
Have you forgotten a 'version=2' line at the start, perhaps?
Skipping the line: Project: utfcpp -
–
Package is not native
Format: 3.0 (quilt) -
–
"Maintainer" email is the same as the uploader
-
–
Package has lintian warningsutfcpp source
-
W
missing-debian-watch-file-standard
- [debian/watch]
-
X
very-long-line-length-in-source-file
- 553 > 512 [README.md:269]
-
W
missing-debian-watch-file-standard
-
–
Package closes ITA bug
-
–
Package is already in Debian
- The package uploader is not currently maintaining utfcpp in Debian
- Last upload was on the 2025-06-02
-
–
d/copyright is in DEP5 format
Upstream Contact: Nemanja Trifunovic Licenses: BSL-1.0
Comments
-
-
Thank you for providing review. Suggested changes are added in new upload except change-log entry "debian/tests: rename run_sample to run-sample to satisfy lintian illegal-runtime-test-name." which resulted in new warning: W: libutfcpp-dev: debian-changelog-line-too-long [usr/share/doc/libutfcpp-dev/changelog.Debian.gz:7] W: libutfcpp-doc: debian-changelog-line-too-long [usr/share/doc/libutfcpp-doc/changelog.Debian.gz:7]
Hello, Thanks a lot for the contribution and for taking over the package :) It already looks quite complete. I would just suggest some small adjustments to make it match common Debian packaging practice: 1. Changelog should mention the new upstream release Since the package went from 4.0.5 to 4.0.8, the changelog should have a line like: * New upstream version 4.0.8. So it is clear this upload is actually pulling in a new upstream tarball. If you are using git-buildpackage, you can run: $ gbp dch and it will usually generate that entry for you based on the git history, then you just adjust the wording. 2. Changelog does not mention all the changes * You added yourself to debian/copyright, but that is not recorded in the debian/changelog. It would be good to add a line such as: * debian/copyright: add myself to debian/* copyright. * You also edited an existing patch to add Forwarded: not-needed, so please record it as well, for instance: * debian/patches/0003-*: add Forwarded: not-needed. * You renamed the autopkgtest from run_sample to run-sample to fix a lintian warning. Please say that explicitly, for instance: * debian/tests: rename run_sample to run-sample to satisfy lintian illegal-runtime-test-name. This is better than the generic: * Renamed autopkgtest to fix lintian warning. Every change under debian/* should be reflected in debian/changelog, so the source package documents exactly what was done in that upload. That way the archive history, BTS references and future maintainers can see why a file changed without having to reconstruct it from the diff. 3. Redundant changelog entry about unstable The line: * Change from experimental to unstable for new upstream version 4.0.8 can be dropped, because the suite is already specified in the changelog header. 4. Standards-Version bump For the Standards-Version bump, you should check the Debian Policy upgrading checklist to confirm whether packaging changes were needed: https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/upgrading-checklist.html You probably already went through this, but mentioning it in the changelog, for example: * Bump Standards-Version to 4.7.2 (no changes needed). makes it explicit for reviewers.