Comment 2 for bug 1645234

feedback from mapreri via #ubuntu-motu

copy-paste IRC

<mapreri> tbh, except usual packaging stuff (like, why didn't you use a DEP5 copyright in 2016?) I wouldn't even know what to look into such package.
<mapreri> and "Copyright 2004" that looks kinda old
<mapreri> and, I doubt that is canonical backed anyway, so it can't be all copyright canonical now, can it.
<mapreri> fossfreedom: are you ok if I drop stuff here, or would you rather prefer to have me write this on the bug report?
<fossfreedom> if you can drop it in the bug report I can then plough my way through that. cheers
<fossfreedom> FYI - talking through with Jeremy Bicha - start point was the ubuntu-gnome-meta package
<mapreri> fossfreedom: you're saying: you just took the ubuntu-gnome-meta package, and construct ubuntu-budgie-meta around it?
<fossfreedom> correct ... was I wrong to start from that?
<mapreri> that's good. Just is very common for ubuntu-only packages to not be up to current best practice (where instead *some* debian maintainers are very good at)
<mapreri> so in this case dep5 copyright. and since 2 months debhelper 10.
<fossfreedom> will fix that.
<mapreri> fossfreedom: btw, why are you not using Architecture:any? IOW: what's up with s390x?
<mapreri> (well, I know you're not going to run a desktop there, probably, but still)
* sergio-br2 (~sergio@177.33.247.89) has joined
<mapreri> fossfreedom: Maintainer: wouldn't be better to have a group here?
<fossfreedom> tbh - no idea about s390x - it was in the ubuntu-gnome-meta package.
<fossfreedom> does the group come from the developer-membership-board? - I could just use the team name ubuntubudgie-dev
<mapreri> " * Skip build of s390x while it is incomplete and uninstallable" (from 2015-12-23). I suggest you reinstate Arch:any for the first upload at least, and possibly tweak later.
<fossfreedom> k - thnx
<mapreri> looking always at the ubuntu-gnome-meta it uses <email address hidden>/ LP ~ubuntu-gnome. Dunno, do you have any list on lists.u.c yet? (no idea how those are handled)
<mapreri> otherwise you could create a ML on ~ubuntubudgie-dev and use that, I guess. In general is very very rare for ubuntu packages to have a single human maintainer, given that the concept of Maintainer in ubuntu is very much meaningless.
<fossfreedom> k - will hit the "ccreate a mailing list" button here https://launchpad.net/~ubuntubudgie-dev
<mapreri> well, same for https://code.launchpad.net/~fossfreedom/ubuntu-seeds/ubuntu-budgie.zesty :) I suggest you move to the same team (you can do it anytime later too, don't do it now :))
<fossfreedom> :)
<mapreri> right
<mapreri> W: ubuntu-budgie-meta source: out-of-date-standards-version 3.9.7 (current is 3.9.8)
<mapreri> W: ubuntu-budgie-desktop: description-synopsis-starts-with-article
<mapreri> fossfreedom: shall I copy all of this to the bug?
<fossfreedom> I can do that. cheers
<mapreri> oh last thing: in the Architecture field of that binary you have a trailing whitespace
<mapreri> guess this is all; there is only so much about a metapackage :3