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

Re: Debian Haskell Policy and group procedures


Am Samstag, den 04.07.2009, 01:48 +0100 schrieb Iain Lane:
> > The debatable details are:
> > * Who sets the release to unstable, and when?
> > * Who sets the git tag and when?
> > With the proposed scheme, the release in the changelog indicates the
> > desired state (package ought to be uploaded), while the tag indicates
> > the real state (this is the state that has been uploaded).
> In pkg-cli-*, which I'm also an active contributor in, the sponsor  
> does both of these. IMO if the contributor also has to RFS somewhere  
> it doesn't matter what the release is set to in the changelog, and  
> it's much easier for people to eyeball by just pulling and viewing the  
> changelog than comparing the latest version against what the tags say.

One advantags of the „contributor sets the distribution“ is, at least if
debchange -r is to be used, that the contributor is left in the
Changed-By field, which makes more sense IMO.

Also, RFS mails might get lost somewhere, having a package in a „fit for
release“ state in the archive does not.

Last advantage is I see is that it’ll be easier to have something like
pet.cgi which will have a way of knowing what packages are waiting to be

Joachim "nomeata" Breitner
Debian Developer
  nomeata@debian.org | ICQ# 74513189 | GPG-Keyid: 4743206C
  JID: nomeata@joachim-breitner.de | http://people.debian.org/~nomeata

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

Reply to: