[SCM] a52dec packaging branch, dima, created. debian/0.7.4-12-13-g47a2e20

[Dmitrijs Ledkovs]

2009/12/10 Fabian Greffrath <greffrath at leat.rub.de>:
> Am 10.12.2009 09:25, schrieb Fabian Greffrath:
>>
>> - The indentation of the copyright holders is inconsistent. Please do
>> only use space characters and don't mix them with tabs. I know this is
>> cosmetic, but while we are at it...
>
> I just pushed what I believe to be a correct debian/copyright file into the
> dep-5 branch (seriously, do we need separate branches for things like
> this?).
>

Well this is the DVC workflow I have used before in other Debian and
Ubuntu teams.

When I started to work on this package I have contacted the person
listed in Uploaders. We have agreed on a few action points. I have
implemented them in a separate branch. He made a review with more
concerns. Me and him addressed them in that branch and then  we merged
it and asked for a sponsor.

I personally prefer it that way. Because it is very tolerant to each
other. Plus branches are cheap ;-) Now the sponsor came in and
reverted commit on master with huge commit log message. Which will
ruin git-dch.

Can we please limit commit log message to 1 line summary +
(optionally) blank line & upto 3 more additional description lines.

Considering that we are using git-dch I believe a review process
between Uploaders & Sponsor should happen before anything is merged to
master.

But I guess I'm new and still learning how to work in this team. This
is the impression I got from the wiki pages. Maybe I'm wrong. But this
is how I feel. Very svn-like "Let's do everything in master".

And as it turned out deb-5 is useful branch cause multiple people are
working on it now without clottering master with work in progress.

I think when we will be done I'm gonna interactivly rebase and squish
commits on dep-5 branch into a single commit "Updated debian/copyright
with correct DEP5 format" and land it on master. Which will represent
1 structural git-dch & debian/changelog friendly changeset.

>> - The debian/watch file does not use the sf redirector. I have no idea
>> why lintian does not complain about this, but it should be changed
>> anyway.
>>
>> <http://lintian.debian.org/tags/debian-watch-file-should-use-sf-redirector.html>
>
> The sf-redirector doesn't seem to work for the liba52 project. This is
> strange, but not of high priority, so let's just keep debian/watch as is it
> for the time beeing.
>
> Cheers,
> Fabian
>



-- 
With best regards


Dmitrijs Ledkovs (for short Dima),
Ледков Дмитрий Юрьевич

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments