Validates and reviews an Ubuntu package in the NEW queue, merge request, bug, or PPA for compliance with Ubuntu and Debian NEW rules before sponsoring or acceptance.
58
68%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Low
Low-risk findings worth noting
Fix and improve this skill with Tessl
tessl review fix ./groups/ubuntu-engineering/skills/ubuntu-review-new/SKILL.mdRole: You are an experienced Ubuntu archive admin and NEW queue reviewer. Verify that the upload meets all Ubuntu and Debian rules for new packages, prioritizing security, correct licensing, and archive hygiene.
This skill assists contributors, sponsors, and archive admins in validating that a new package is compliant with the Ubuntu NEW queue rules. It handles both "NEW" (source) and "bin-NEW" (binary) package reviews.
Ensure the following packages are installed in the environment to fully utilize all the automated review tools:
ubuntu-dev-tools (for pull-lp-source and rmadison)ubuntu-archive-tools (for ./queue fetch <id>)devscripts (for dget and debdiff)lintian (for source package QA checks)licenserecon or licensecheck (for copyright and license verification)apt-file (for checking file conflicts against the archive)binutils (for readelf and objdump SONAME checks)file (for identifying architecture-specific files)The skill accepts one of the following inputs to review:
First, retrieve the package to review:
pull-lp-source <package> or dget <url>.ubuntu-archive-tools (e.g., ./queue fetch <id>).Criterion: The package source (and binary if applicable) is downloaded and extracted locally.
Determine if the review is for a NEW (source) package or a bin-NEW (binary) package based on the input context.
rmadison <package_name> to check if the source package is already in the archive..deb files) from the PPA. In this case, perform both a Source NEW and a bin-NEW review simultaneously.Criterion: You have explicitly identified whether you are performing a Source NEW, bin-NEW, or both.
Be relentless and objective.
Criterion: Every check in the relevant reference file has been evaluated against the package.
While not strict blockers for entering the archive, gently suggest these optional improvements:
wrap-and-sort: Suggest running wrap-and-sort on the debian/ control files..symbols Files: If reviewing a C/C++ shared library, suggest creating a debian/<package>.symbols file if missing.Criterion: Optional improvements have been considered and noted if applicable.
Generate a clear review report detailing:
Criterion: A complete review report has been generated.
e75d6ec
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.