new Pd packages looking for sponsors

[Jonas Smedegaard]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 07:35:31PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 18:57, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:46:58AM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:06, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I propose the following:
>>>>
>>>>  * As a minimum, the changelog is completely untouched until final
>>>>    release, where the uploader auto-generates using "git-dch -R", 
>>>>    adjusts by hand as needed, and commits the changes.
>>>>  * Optionally intermediate updates to the changelog can be applied.
>>>>    Begin with "git-dch" and if that fails then instead use
>>>>    "git-dch --since <REF>" (replacing <REF> with reference to last
>>>>    commit that touched debian/changelog), set distribution to
>>>>    UNRELEASED, and commit the changes.
>>>>  * Intermediate changelog updates are encouraged when release is
>>>>    expected only later, and when more people work on same package.
>>>
>>> But if the primary worker on a package thinks the package is ready 
>>> for release, the trailer line should be updated, I believe.
>>
>> What you here describe is not an intermediate update but a final one. 
>> If updating trailer line isn't implied by the git-dch -R option then 
>> I suggest to drop that option (and file a bugreport about it!) and 
>> instead afterwards invoke "dch -r" which it was supposed to mimic.
>
>The case I'm thinking about is for people who can't upload directly. I 
>don't want to put my name in the changelog entry when the most work was 
>done by someone else, if I can avoid it.

I do understand what case you talk about.  And I disagree with your 
preference of hiding yourself if "only" responsible for passing on those 
changes to Debian officially.

I feel the responsibility of uploading is quite real, and should be 
clearly readable in the changelog.  Yes, I know that it is possible also 
to gather that info elsewhere if online, but the fact that you chose to 
consider the packaging final, and you chose to make the version number 
and timestamp official, is reason for you to mention yourself in the 
changelog IMO.

Hope that was clear.  We can agree to disagree if you prefer, just want 
to make sure that we know on what we disagree :-)


>>>> In other words, I propose to replace the earlier commit style 
>>>> (documented in the wiki?) of unconditionally adding UNRELEASED - 
>>>> which does not work optimally together with git-dch IMO.
>>>
>>> If you use the changelog heuristic (see man dch), dch will leave the 
>>> to as UNRELEASED and the trailer line not updated. At release time, 
>>> one can issue a dch -r that will update both. This workflow is good, 
>>> because it lets us know when someone believes the package is ready 
>>> at the time one looks at the package.
>>
>> The addition of an UNRELEASED hint as a sole change to changelog file 
>> is a waste IMO, and makes it harder for git-dch to resolve its 
>> starting point.
>
>Not harder, thanks to the -a flag. It will use the last commit where 
>the changelog was touched as a starting point.

Ah, ok.  Then it is only a waste, not overly cumbersome as well. :-)


  - Jonas

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

  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-multimedia-maintainers/attachments/20101111/e66ea16f/attachment-0001.pgp>