[needs-packaging] cmocka-extensions

[Alexandre Esse]

Currently working on elos (https://github.com/Elektrobit/elos) software packaging, the first dependency I would like to integrate into Ubuntu is cmocka-extensions (https://github.com/Elektrobit/cmocka_extensions).

cmocka-extensions are cmocka unit testing framework for C extended features used by elos and other projects.

This package extends basic cmocka features and intoduces:
 * weak mocking
 * wrap mocking
 * and some definitions to make creating and running the unit tests a bit easier that the basic cmocka

[Steve Langasek (vorlon)]

independent of anything else, the package uploaded to the NEW queue in oracular does not have a compliant Ubuntu version number: 0.50.0-7 was never a Debian package version, as cmocka-extensions has never been in Debian (and is not in the NEW queue currently). Please reupload with a correct version number (-0ubuntu1).

[Loïc Minier (lool)]

Hey Steve,
Thanks for the feedback, just trying to pick a number that is higher than any previously used revisions, as Emlix is building their own debs using a Debian versioning scheme. Happy to reupload as -0ubuntu1, ignoring the Emlix versions entirely if you think that's a better strategy.

(We'll pass feedback to Emlix about not using Debian revisions.)

[Brian Murray (brian-murray)]

*** This is an automated message ***

This bug is tagged needs-packaging which identifies it as a request for a new package in Ubuntu. As a part of the managing needs-packaging bug reports specification, https://wiki.ubuntu.com/QATeam/Specs/NeedsPackagingBugs, all needs-packaging bug reports have Wishlist importance. Subsequently, I'm setting this bug's status to Wishlist.

[Łukasz Zemczak (sil2100)]

Had a quick look at the package itself. In general it looks good, however two things I'd like addressed first:

1) The versioning. Thank you for modifying the versioning scheme of the package, now it's correct. Personally I'm not a big fan of leaving this confusing state there, with many of the previous entries having a higher version number than the main one. Potentially this can also confuse some tooling. How opinionated are you about keeping around the history?

Also in a related note: have these packages been already used somewhere by a customer? Since then it's important to know that until the next upstream version is prepared, they will NOT upgrade to this package.

2) The licensing checks out, however in general, when there's no hard rationale, packages created and maintained by Canonical should have the debian/ directory copyrighted under Canonical and under a GPLv3 license. Any reason it's not the case here?

[Loïc Minier (lool)]

I'll respond at least for the version part since I chose the current changelog setup

We've started cmocka-extensions from debian/ packaging created upstream (by an ex-Canonical employee :-), so the copyright is to them, but I guess we should now extend it to Canonical since we've developed some changes.

This is also why there is a history of previous changelog entries that I preserved for clarity to the packagers who worked upstream and on the Ubuntu version of the package.

I'm ok with dropping the previous changelog entries if you think they could break some tools.