Review for Package: pappl

[Summary]
This looks fine, small, well tested, modern packaging - all good.
MIR team ACK

But it does IMHO need a security review, so I'll assign ubuntu-security

List of specific binary packages to be promoted to main: libpappl1, libpappl-dev
Specific binary packages built, but NOT to be promoted to main: <none>

Notes:
- the -dev package says "... package contains the static library ..."
  But it does not. Consider updating the description one day, but this is
  very non-important - not worth a being hard todo for you, but worth an fyi.

Required TODOs:
- The package should get a team bug subscriber before being promoted

Recommended TODOs:
- none

[Duplication]
There are printin libs, sure - but the purpose and need for this is very
much tied to wrapping cups printer drivers to behave like printer applications.
That isn't provided elsewhere.
=> There is no other package in main providing the same functionality.

[Dependencies]
OK:
- no other Dependencies to MIR due to this (all are already in main)
- no -dev/-debug/-doc packages that need exclusion (also all in main)
- No dependencies in main that are only superficially tested requiring
  more tests now.

Problems: None

[Embedded sources and static linking]
OK:
- no embedded source present (there are a few IDE files, but no code)
- no static linking
- not a go package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- not a rust package, no extra constraints to consider in that regard
- Does not include vendored code

Problems: None

[Security]
OK:
- history of CVEs does not look concerning, but it is also rather new.
  Generally the printer drivers have ahd lots of issues as they are a good
  attack vector, hence I'd not wonder if this would have issues found in the
  future.
- does not run a daemon as root
- does not use webkit1,2
- does not use lib*v8 directly
- does not open a port/socket
- does not process arbitrary web content
- does not use centralized online accounts
- does not integrate arbitrary javascript into the desktop
- does not deal with system authentication (eg, pam), etc)
- does not deal with security attestation (secure boot, tpm, signatures)
- does not deal with cryptography (en-/decryption, certificates, signing, ...)

Problems:
- does parse data formats (things to print) from an untrusted source.

[Common blockers]
OK:
- does not FTBFS currently
- does have a test suite that runs at build time
  - test suite fails will fail the build upon error.
- does have a non-trivial test suite that runs as autopkgtest
- This does not seem to need special HW for build or test
 so it can't be
- no new python2 dependency

Problems: None

[Packaging red flags]
OK:
- Ubuntu does not carry a delta
- symbols tracking is in place
- d/watch is present and looks ok
- Upstream update history is good, but has no long track record yet
- Debian/Ubuntu update history is good, but has no long track record yet
- the current release is packaged
- promoting this does not seem to cause issues for MOTUs that so far
  maintained the package
- no massive Lintian warnings
- d/rules is rather clean
- It is not on the lto-disabled list

Problems: None

[Upstream red flags]
OK:
- no Errors/warnings during the build
- no incautious use of malloc/sprintf (as far as we can check it)
- no use of sudo, gksu, pkexec, or LD_LIBRARY_PATH (usage is OK inside
  tests)
- no use of user nobody
- no use of setuid
- no important open bugs (crashers, etc) in Debian or Ubuntu
- no dependency on webkit, qtwebkit, seed or libgoa-*
- not part of the UI for extra checks
- no translation present, but none needed for this case

Problems: None