[Pkg-jed-commit] r701 - jed/branches/0.99.19/debian

[Jörg Sommer]

Hallo Rafael,

Rafael Laboissiere schrieb am Fri 18. May, 14:59 (+0200):
> * Jörg Sommer <joerg at alea.gnuu.de> [2007-05-18 11:14]:
> 
> > Rafael Laboissiere schrieb am Thu 17. May, 15:30 (+0200):
> > > * Jörg Sommer <joerg at alea.gnuu.de> [2007-05-17 13:45]:
> > > 
> > > > Rafael Laboissiere schrieb am Wed 16. May, 22:51 (+0000):
> > > > > +  * Changed the upstream version numbering scheme, where the number after
> > > > > +    "+pre" corresponds to the micro version of the unstable Jed
> > > > > +    branch. [RL]
> > > > > +  * debian/rules:
> > > > > +    + Simplified the get-orig-source rule [JS]
> > > > 
> > > > Do you think we should mention such changes in the /Debian/ changelog?
> > > > They aren't visible to and interesting for a package user.
> > > 
> > > Well, the change in the numbering scheme *_is_* visible to the user and she
> > > may be interested to know the reason for the change.  At any rate, we are
> > > targeting here our "power" users, which are using the package in
> > > experiemental.
> > 
> > Yes. I meant the ???Simplified ?????? message.
> 
> Oh, I see.  I did not think you referred to the "Simplified..." message,
> because *_you_* put that in debian/changelog.

No, I've cited the diff from your commit.

% svn log -r650:HEAD changelog | grep \^r
r689 | jo-guest | 2007-05-15 17:26:06 +0200 (Di, 15 Mai 2007) | 16 lines
r701 | rafael | 2007-05-17 00:51:07 +0200 (Do, 17 Mai 2007) | 7 lines
r706 | rafael | 2007-05-17 15:21:36 +0200 (Do, 17 Mai 2007) | 1 line
r711 | rafael | 2007-05-17 21:31:00 +0200 (Do, 17 Mai 2007) | 3 lines
r712 | rafael | 2007-05-17 22:51:18 +0200 (Do, 17 Mai 2007) | 1 line
% svn cat -r 689 changelog | head   
jed (0.99.19~pre78-1) experimental; urgency=low

  * New upstream release, taken from the upstream SVN repository at
    gna.org.

  * Dropped debian/patches/fix-pymode-block-end.dpatch, which is now
    applied upstream. [JS]

 --

> Anyway, I do not see problems with logging such changes in
> debian/changelog.

I think it's useless for package users and blows up the changelog.

> > > This will delete the *.orig.tar.gz which is in the unpacked directory for
> > > the package.  We need the the *.orig.tar.gz file which is at the directory
> > > above.
> > 
> > Where comes this file from? I wouldn't remove files the user has created
> > (e.g. by calling debian/rules get-orig-source).
> 
> I see.  What about getting the get-orig-source to create the *.orig.tar.gz
> file in the directory above?

No, policy says:
  `get-orig-source' (optional)
       This target fetches the most recent version of the original
       source package from a canonical archive site (via FTP or WWW, for
       example), does any necessary rearrangement to turn it into the
       original source tar file format described below, and leaves it in
       the current directory.
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Bye, Jörg.
-- 
Da würde ich auch lieber den Panzerführerschein machen als den MCSE.
Bringt mehr, dürfte das gleiche kosten und macht sicher mehr Spaß.
                                   Jens Dittmar in de.comp.security
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 481 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-jed-devel/attachments/20070518/8f51dd6b/attachment.pgp