Re: Best practices for changelogs
This was discussed some time ago on debian-mentors.
I think the general consensus was to increment the package version
after each change. The archive administrators don't particularly care
for which version is the final version uploaded, and it makes it
easier for sponsors to see what changes were made.
On Nov 14, 2007 3:01 PM, Vincent Fourmond <email@example.com> wrote:
> alien-arena was rejected yesterday, for a very simple reason: I
> uploaded the 6.10-2 version when no 6.10-1 was uploaded, and I simply
> forgot to add the right options to dpkg-buildpackage to make sure the
> source would be included in the upload. This is due to the fact that the
> -2 revision was used by Andres to make it clear that the package had
> been updated with respect to the -1 revision.
> There is my question: is 'silent' changelog entries fine ? By silent,
> I means changelog entries that do not correspond to any upload to
> debian. There are two aspects about this:
> * I know that when I was myself sponsored, I tended to want to do
> this, first because I wasn't sure that mentors.debian.net would accept a
> second upload with the same version, and second because it was more
> clear for me, and I thought it would be more visible to potential uploaders.
> * on the other hand, dealing with 'skipped' debian revisions is
> painful for the uploader:
> - you need to specify the -v(last_uploaded_version_number) option to
> - and, as was the case for alien-arena, you shouldn't forget the -sa
> when the -1 revision was skipped.
> This isn't much, but I've just proven it is error-prone ;-)...
> So what about silent or skipped changelog entries ? Is that fine, or
> should we try to avoid that as much as possible ?
> Vincent, who finally (hopefully) uploaded alien-arena correctly ;-)...
> Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer
> -- pretty boring signature, isn't it ?
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com