Re: RFS: proxycheck -- link
On Saturday 28 January 2006 18:57, Thomas Viehmann wrote:
> Christoph Haas wrote:
> > - Please don't change past entries in the changelog even though
> > I understand that you wanted to correct the line wrapping.
>
> Correcting factual mistakes or typos in the changelog seems to be
> accepted practice and I can't really see the harm of doing so with the
> line wrapping and such as long as all information is preserved...
That was more a general hint because I have already seen major changes in
the changelog in some sponsored packages. Changing line wraps surely is no
problem.
> > - Consider using "dpatch" for changing the upstream sources.
> > You may find it easier to keep or remove patches when the next
> > upstream version is released.
>
> It's good to know the option, but for minor changes that are likely to
> either be kept or accepted upstream, I've found it easier to use the
> original patch. I don't think you (Christoph) wanted to require it -
> otherwise you wouldn't have uploaded the package - but for the casual
> reader, it could be even clearer that this is a matter of preference and
> consideration on a case by case basis.
In case I accidentally sounded like I wanted to enforce anything: that was
just a hint for Al since many (new) maintainers don't know dpatch and
happily patch around the upstream's source and sometimes start to get lost
in it. In such a (rather simple) package it doesn't make much of a
difference.
Since I already uploaded the package I'm perfectly happy with it. Just
wanted to give some hints that may perhaps be useful or just be ignored.
In my first packages I hadn't used dpatch because nobody told me how to
keep track of multiple patches and still keep my sanity. So I'm used to
sometimes just give a hint even though nobody is listening.
Hoping that I could convince you that I'm not just an egocentric sadistic
sponsoree torturer...
Christoph ;)
--
Never trust a system administrator who wears a tie and suit.
Reply to: