[request-tracker-maintainers] reckuest-tracker4 improvements

[Dominic Hargreaves]

On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 04:24:11PM +1100, Dmitry Smirnov wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:49:44 Dominic Hargreaves wrote:

> > Okay. I think there is already a bug about providing alternatives to
> > Apache, but I can't find it right now.
> 
> >From quick search it could be #486633:
> 
>     http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=486633
> 
> or #503454:
> 
>     http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=503454
> 
> It is truly annoying to pull apache if request tracker meant to be used with 
> different web-server.

Yes, that's the one.

> > >   * Patch to add the changes above to debian/changelog
> > 
> > debian/changelog entries should, where possible, be included in the
> > patch/commit to which they relate, rather than separate - makes it much
> > easier to pick out the relevant changes.
> 
> Sure, I will comply. 
> 
> For some reason I thought that if you only want to apply some of my changes 
> but not all of them this could make cherry-picking easier.

Maybe - although including changelog entries with the commit means that
it's harder for changelog entries to go missing :)

> With your permission I can properly push the proposed changes one by one, 
> accompanied with changelog notes.

I provided some more review in an email I just sent (sorry about the
delay).

In the first instance, could you provide another set of patches to
apply (and I propose to look at them more quickly this time!)

> > Incidentally, you should normally set the distribution in a changelog
> > entry to UNRELEASED unless you are finalising an entry just before upload.
> > 
> 
> No worries, will do so.
> 
> Sorry about this - I reckon partially it comes from bad habit of publishing to 
> mentors which only accept packages targeted for 'unstable'.
> Also this was more for your knowledge rather than to be directly applied.
> 
> 
> > > Just wondering why we're using a private 'ckeditor' copy instead of
> > > depending on 'ckeditor' package?
> > > Is there are a technical problem with this?
> > 
> > IIRC the precise version of ckeditor is needed - previously, if it now,
> > upstream modified ckeditor in place.

Ugh, must have been tired when I wrote that.
 
> Interesting. Is this worth mentioning in README.source ?

It's mentioned in debian/lintian-overrides, although I don't recall
the precise nature of the customisations now (the upstream git repo
may know better than I do).

Cheers,
Dominic.

-- 
Dominic Hargreaves | http://www.larted.org.uk/~dom/
PGP key 5178E2A5 from the.earth.li (keyserver,web,email)