Re: Emdebian
On 2006-11-07 10:55 +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
> >> Actually, I really like this last proposal, in that it is the most
> >> honest: it keeps the Debian changelog untouched, while allowing all
> >> the standard tools to work unchanged as far as the changelog is
> >> concerned.
> >
> >This sounds plausible to me too.
> >
> > Perhaps I am missing something but what's wrong with a simple patch
> >to be applied to the changelog? Patches for everything was the
> >original cocept. So we have a debian changelog and then the emdebian
> >diff adds emdebian info to it.
>
> Consider this timeline:
>
>
> Debian (Buildd) Emdebian
> ------- ------ ---------
> 1.2-1
> 1.2-1em1
> 1.2-1em2
> 1.2-2 (FTBFS)
> 1.2-2.1 (NMU)
> 1.2-2.1em1
> 1.2-2.1em2
> 1.3-1
> 1.3-1em1
right - I thought that might be the problem.
> The patches to insert the emN entries into debian/changelog in time
> order will get more and more complex as time goes by because we'll
> still be patching the 1.2-1em1 changes into the debian/changelog in
> version 2.8-2em5! (Debian maintainers aren't going to be including our
> changelog entries in their uploads - or was that the plan?)
For anything we succeed in pushing upstream then yes it gets included,
but under the normal version numbers.
> It makes for a very confusing .em.diff.gz - very difficult to follow.
> Just as the debian changelog is separate from the upstream changelog,
> it looks a better solution - at this stage - to have a separate
> changelog for emdebian.
OK. But the tradeoff of that is having to change the build tools,
which we were seeing if we could avoid. OK, so we get a long diff over
time, but it is nice and simple.
I don't feel strongly either way. Clarity is important. So is
avoiding debian tool changes that we can't push upstream.
> >I think lintian has config for tests to skip by default etc. Setting
> >these for emdebian use shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps lintian could
> >do it automatically when it sees .emdebs, but we can also just teach
> >developers to set them manually in a HOWTO.
>
> Agreed.
>
> >That is indeed what we are trying to do. But writing down some of the
> >stuff in this thread to remind us why we chose things might be a good
> >idea as we go along. Obvsiouly nothing is set even in plasticene yet.
>
> I'm composing a "summary" for the list at the moment. I've asked Julian
> if he wouldn't mind subscribing to debian-embedded and we'll go from
> there.
OK, great. They'll be wanting that after this sudden mid-conversation
influx.
Wookey
--
Aleph One Ltd, Bottisham, CAMBRIDGE, CB5 9BA, UK Tel +44 (0) 1223 811679
work: http://www.aleph1.co.uk/ play: http://wookware.org/
Reply to: