New upstream version 0.16.1
Details
Details
- Reviewers
kc2bez wxl - Commits
- rLIBLXQTPACKAGING810c84bd565e: Merge form upstream.
Test if it's a correct merge.
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- rLIBLXQTPACKAGING liblxqt Packaging
- Lint
Automatic diff as part of commit; lint not applicable. - Unit
Automatic diff as part of commit; unit tests not applicable.
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
That does match up to Debian though I have to say the commented bits in d/control seems strange.
Comment Actions
I have one little problem.
| debian/copyright | ||
|---|---|---|
| 11 ↗ | (On Diff #313) | ^ This kind of bugs me. Why are we removing copyright information? Maybe this is because LXQt backlight helper was dropped and those were the developers? I think it's super messy that we still have some remnants of it commented out. |
Comment Actions
So what do we do? Remove completely the backlight part instead of commenting it out or keep it commented out and include the copyright section?
| debian/copyright | ||
|---|---|---|
| 11 ↗ | (On Diff #313) | To clarify here, my feelings about using comments to remove things is really just an annoyance on my part due to bad form upstream. That's not the reason for not accepting this. My concern is with removing copyright information which is, as a general rule, bad. I don't know that this is because of backlight helper, but given the comments, I'm thinking that *may* be why. It needs further investigation to justify this in my mind. |
Comment Actions
The more I look at this the crazier it makes me. Like why are we commenting out the backlight crap that we are then installing in the install file? This is madness. That said, it does seem to build without errors (confirmed by my own hand), so I guess I'll just turn a blind eye. I guess we can always fix it later if needed.
Going forward, I really think we should maybe just ignore Debian and package from upstream. I mean that's what CI kind of does anyways.
I'll land this with an OK from @kc2bez.
P.S. If I'm going to be super nitpicky your timestamp should be updated, but whatever.
Comment Actions
I am good with this. I find the commented stuff weird too. It isn't prohibited in the policy manual but it isn't exactly encouraged either.