Re: changelog, bugs, source NMU
On Fri, Jun 30, 2000 at 03:14:47PM +0200, Tom Cato Amundsen wrote:
> My sponsor is on a holyday, so you get this....
>
> My question is about debian/changelog.
>
> 1.
> First, should it only mention releases that are actually
> included into debian?
>
> I am the upstream author of solfege, and the tarball includes
> the debian/ subdirectory. So each release I add a entry to the
> debian/changelog file, so .debs are built with the correct
> version. (Even if that version is not uploaded to incoming.)
I am also author of a program that I maintain in Debian. I use the
debian/changelog for all of my entries, even if the versions aren't
included in the archive. I also link ChangeLog to debian/changelog in the
tarball. You're free to handle it your own way, but that's just an example
to go on.
> 2.
> Right now version 0.7.10-2 is included in debian, and a source
> NMU is just uploaded. I am working on 0.7.14, and has included the
> same bugfixes as the NMU. Should I copy-and-paste the changelog
> into the real changelog, or maybe include a (closes: #nnnnn) to
> version 0.7.14 when that is uploaded by my sponsor?
You should include the changelog entry so it is documented for future
interest. Acknowledging NMU's in your changelog is very important.
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: