[Debian-olpc-devel] "readme.source and readme.cdbs" (was Re: Bug#485233: Path still broken in 23-2

[Jonas Smedegaard]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Feb 01, 2009 at 05:02:56PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:

>On Mittwoch, 3. Dezember 2008, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 07:27:32PM +0100, Holger Levsen wrote:
>> >On Wednesday 03 December 2008 19:04, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> >> Info to Sugar maintainers:
>> >>
>> >> Generally when editing stuff below debian/cdbs first consult 
>> >> http://svn.debian.org/wsvn/build-common/people/js/overlay/ - and 
>> >> consider informing me about any improvements you apply to local 
>> >> copies of those files.
>> >
>> >Ack. Should probably added to README.packaging?
>>
>> Better do this instead:
>>
>> 1) Duplicate contents of README.Packaging on some wiki page
>
>I will do this tomorrow. When I'm home tonite I'll be too tired :-(/ 
>(writing this offline.)
>
>> 2) Update wiki page with above hint
>>
>> 3) Add README.source Or is it capital Source?), pointing to wiki page
>
>Do you propose to just include a pointer to the wiki page in 
>README.source or do you propose to only describe the stuff directly 
>relevant to the sugar packages in sugars README.source and only provide 
>a pointer for the cdbs stuff in there?
>
>If its the 2nd, I'm with you. If it's the first, I disagree, since I 
>believe a source package should be useful/understandable without 
>network.
>
>(/me expects the 2nd ;)
>
>> 4) Drop README.Packaging

I did mean 1st, but I agree with you that 2nd is better (and reading 
Debian Policy section 4.14 clearly states that all documentation needs 
to be available offline, contrary to my earlier understanding of that).

Still, I find it cumbersome (until a later switch to topgit which 
actually supports this!) to maintain virtually identical instructions 
across all Sugar packages. So I propose the following slight revision:

1) Duplicate contents of README.Packaging on some wiki page

2) Update wiki page with above hint

3) Copy README.source from wiki page

4) Drop README.Packaging

5) Extend debian/rules to always copy README.source from wiki page 
during clean when DEB_MAINTAINER_MODE is set.


In other words: Please go ahead setting up that wiki page and improving 
it from info gathered in these emails: It _is_ a great help!


>> I agree that we should only release packages working with 0.82 
>> release of Sucrose.
>>
>> I do not agree that we should avoid activity releases newer than 
>> upstream releases, as long as they work properly with 0.82.
>
>I dont think we should try to be smarter than upstream. In general I 
>trust their ability to judge whether versions work together well, 
>better than us.

I suspect that you do not understand the issue at hand.

Upstream generally claim newer releases of activities to work fine on 
older releases of Sugar.


>> What made you resolve Calculate 0.25 as belonging to Sugar 0.83?
>
>The sugarlabs wiki page for the 0.82 release said calculate was at 
>0.23.

The Sugarlabs wiki or the OLPC wiki?


  - Jonas

- -- 
* Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt
* Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkmGChAACgkQn7DbMsAkQLjLzgCfXA/uQrUYwbE0ISYsaT5xNBTE
YFEAnjRMhCHTxlcnuDwq8sxFOqxakzYN
=e5dM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----