[Pkg-jed-commit] r887 - jed/branches/0.99.19/debian

[Rafael Laboissiere]

* Jörg Sommer <joerg at alea.gnuu.de> [2007-09-22 14:00]:

> Rafael Laboissiere schrieb am Fri 21. Sep, 15:01 (+0000):
> > Author: rafael
> > Date: 2007-09-21 15:01:52 +0000 (Fri, 21 Sep 2007)
> > New Revision: 887
> > 
> > Modified:
> >    jed/branches/0.99.19/debian/changelog
> > Log:
> > * debian/control: Added Homepage field (this is already supported in 
> >   dpkg 1.141.6) 
> > 
> > 
> > Modified: jed/branches/0.99.19/debian/changelog
> > ===================================================================
> > --- jed/branches/0.99.19/debian/changelog	2007-09-21 15:00:21 UTC (rev 886)
> > +++ jed/branches/0.99.19/debian/changelog	2007-09-21 15:01:52 UTC (rev 887)
> > @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@
> > +jed (1:0.99.19~pre102-4) UNRELEASED; urgency=low
> 
> Why did you start a new version? The old one is UNRELEASED.

No, I was doing a semi-automated update of all packages that I maintain or
co-maintain, by adding the Homepage header in the debian/control files. I
did some mistakes, although I just fixed the debian/changelog files in SVN
for 0.99.18 and 0.99.19.

Sorry for the confusion.

> > +  * debian/control: Added Homepage field
> 
> I don't would add it again. It was added in 1:0.99.18-1 and when we
> import the changes from the trunk tree into the 0.99.19 tree we get it.

What was added in 1:0.99.18-1 was the pseudoheader Homepage at the end of
the long description.  I added the Homepage field to the Source section of
debian/control, as discussed recently in debian-devel [1].

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/09/msg00628.html

> I would like to revert your change and merge the changes from r886. Is
> this okay?

I do not see a need to revert my changes.

> And why did you choose as new version for the trunk tree 0.99.18-1
> without dfsg…?

My bad, see above.  Fixed already in SVN.

-- 
Rafael