Re: RFS: xpn

[schönfeld / in-medias-res <schoenfeld@in-medias-res.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jan C. Nordholz wrote:
> Why should I try to hide the normal course of development?  I don't see

I agree that this *is* suboptimal. But it should not be part of normal
development cycle to create extra revisions that you do not release,
should it? IMHO it makes sense for some developer-only changelog, but
the debian/changelog has gotten a file, which is shown to the users
often and it might seem odd to them if versions therein do not exist.

> the necessity to create extra loops (reformatting the changelog after
> each intermediate package creation that is not uploaded) for me to jump

Well you are right in this point. But I seem to develope my packages in
another way then you. Cause i only start a new changelog entry, if i
really uploaded something through my sponsor to the archive.

> Hm, hard to tell. Oh, and for more real-world examples...

Yeah yeah. I think you are right if you say, that it *is* used and that
its okay to be used (even though i don't agree with it), but i would not
recommend it either, cause I think there are a lot of sponsors that just
will not upload such packages. This opinion results from the fact, that
I have seen more people criticizing multiple changelog entries/versions
for just a single release, then people that say that it is okay.

- -Patrick
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG3Ft5TKIzE6LY9r8RAu3qAKCM3OKsROlvo/OU7nkjr/HnFDoO7gCfazg/
PcJpWBo4fjf4hwaz6aIx6/o=
=wdo7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----