[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [RFH] Debian 2.6.32 CONFIG_WIRELESS_OLD_REGULATORY, wireless-regdb and crda

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kel Modderman <kel@otaku42.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 March 2010 04:13:25 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:47 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
>> >
>> >> FWIW, I don't create the tarballs.  Perhaps we could ask Johannes to
>> >> do something in his scripts that create them?  Beyond that I don't
>> >> see much point in checking-in a ChangeLog.
>> I can add that too.
>> > It definitely shouldn't be checked into git, but rather generated from
>> > the git commit logs; with git2cl, git log or similar. With an autotools
>> > based build system you would add a command to the Makefile.am so that
>> > automake runs git2cl during 'make dist' / 'make distcheck'. For
>> > non-autotools based projects you usually won't have a standard 'make
>> > dist' so it would need to be added to whatever script is the equivalent.
>> >
>> >> Do you like that git2cl output?  It seems rather ugly to me...
>> >
>> > Its the standard ancient GNU form for a ChangeLog. I have no opinion on
>> > its aesthetics and I don't think it matters what format it has really.
>> I think the format is indeed pretty ugly, can't we just do:
>> git log v0.9.8..v0.9.9 > ChangeLog
>> I've attached an example output of this on the iw package for example.
>> Paul, does Debian packaging not care the format the ChangeLog is on?
> FWIW, I do not think all of this is necessary, the information stored in the
> git repository is rich and readily available. We're getting pedantic here.

Can you guys upstream a package into Debian with a gitweb URL reference?


Reply to: