Sign me up Login

Details about package xchpst

Name: xchpst
Uploader: Andrew Bower <andrew@bower.uk> (Debian QA page)
Description: xchpst - eXtended CHange Process STate

Package uploads

Upload #2

Information

Version: 0.2.1-1
Uploaded: 2025-01-07 18:26
Source package: xchpst_0.2.1-1.dsc
Distribution: unstable
Section: admin
Priority: optional
Homepage: https://gitlab.com/abower/xchpst
Closes bugs: #1092288

Changelog

 xchpst (0.2.1-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Initial release (Closes: #1092288)

QA information

Comments

No comments

Upload #1

Information

Version: 0.2.0-1
Uploaded: 2025-01-06 22:56
Source package: xchpst_0.2.0-1.dsc
Distribution: unstable
Section: admin
Priority: optional
Homepage: https://gitlab.com/abower/xchpst
Closes bugs: #1092288

Changelog

 xchpst (0.2.0-1) unstable; urgency=medium
 .
   * Initial release (Closes: #1092288)

QA information

Comments

  1. In order to prevent issues that slow this package down at a later stage, I wonder if I may seek some advice in advance?
    
    The binary package includes a script (xchpst.fake) and man page (xchpst.fake.8) in the _documentation_ that are intended to be donated to another package (runit) once this one is accepted to support degraded operation for users of this new facility when xchpst is not installed. Lintian doesn't complain but might these be unwelcome anyway in the binary package doc area?
    
    Furthermore, these are dual licenced as BSD-3 in order that the donee package can incorporate them without carrying an additional licence type. Would it be preferable to remove these from the xchpst binary package entirely and separately donate them under the second licence to the intended donee package?
    Andrew Bower at Jan. 7, 2025, 9:22 a.m.
  2. I've addressed my own question pre-emptively... new upload incoming imminently with these files removed from the binary package to keep the story simple!
    Andrew Bower at Jan. 7, 2025, 5:27 p.m.