[Pkg-netatalk-devel] Comments on netatalk 2.2.5-1

[Chris Boot]

On 23/04/14 17:25, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> As you might have noticed, I finalized and released netatalk 2.2.5-1.

Yes, thank you!

> I agreed with most of the changes - except mostly stylistic details.  
> Comments below...
> 
> Quoting Chris Boot (2014-04-19 15:49:23)
>> I've setup a temporary separate netatalk.git on Alioth just to stage 
>> my changes for now:
>>
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=users/bootc-guest/netatalk.git
> 
> It find it much easier if we stick to one git most possible.

Agreed, I just didn't want to plow ahead with my first few commits and
then revert them or whatnot. That repo is now gone.

> Please commit actual changes separately from auto-generated ones and 
> meta changes like changelog updates.  That eases e.g. cherry-picking 
> across branches.
> 
> control file is auto-generated from control.in, with this command:
> 
>   debian/rules clean DEB_MAINTAINER_MODE=1
> 
> Put as first line of the commit message the text as is likely useful to 
> reuse in changelog, and then (either immediately afterwards or later, 
> perhaps only once just before releasing the package) run "git dch -a" 
> and tidy its result.

We should probably document that in README.source or similar. This is
very different from how I've been working on other packages, so it'll be
useful to have it written down somewhere so that any member of the team
can refer to it easily.

> NB! Please both of you add yourself as "Uploaders" in control.in, no 
> matter if you have actual upload rights: We use that field to indicate 
> who is actively maintaining this particular package in our team - which 
> is our only package so we should all be added there (the "team upload" 
> hint in changelog is arguably only for "unusual" team uploads done by 
> "others" in the team than the main maintainers).

Agreed, and done.

I do have a slight question regarding your commit 3052f3a9dc7c where you
edit the DEP3 patch header. First of all, I think you mean DEP3 (patch
tagging) rather than DEP5 (copyright format). Second, and this may just
be a question of style, but I'm confident my header was in a valid
format. I wrote it that way so that it could be easily forwarded
upstream, including the S-o-b line, without having to reformat it. It
loosely followed the first example on http://dep.debian.net/deps/dep3/
but I'm happy to format them with the alternative syntax if you'd rather.

Cheers,
Chris

-- 
Chris Boot
debian at bootc.net
GPG: 8467 53CB 1921 3142 C56D  C918 F5C8 3C05 D9CE EEEE