El lun, 26-11-2007 a las 16:30 +0100, Patrick Schoenfeld escribió: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 06:23:50PM -0400, Jose Luis Rivas Contreras wrote: > > You need a new changelog for Debian starting from scratch and you could > > adapt the copyright (if the license allow it) or just make one new. > > Why? Thats IMHO a very bad way to do it. > > 1) changelog is to track was has been done in the package since its > beginning. since it is orignating from an ubuntu package, why should its > history be dropped? That has several disadvantages, including that its > impossible to track any change that happened before the initial Debian > release. Very bad. Also its not fair to the Ubuntu maintainers that did > the initial and eventually biggest part of the work. You simply ignore > the fact that they did something in the history of the package. > Besides from beeing unfair it might be a license violation, depending on > how the ubuntu packaging has been licensed. > Not too long ago, about 4 years, when Ubuntu didn't exist, I tried to upload my first package to Debian. It was a package we had been using in LinEx (our Extremadura Debian based distribution). My sponsor and some other people at Debian told me that changelog should begin when the package begins in Debian, no matter if it had been used before somewhere else. I don't know if there is a policy for this, but I would like to think there are no preferences between some derivatives and some others. I have not seen changelogs containing knoppix, progeny, mepis or linex entries... > 2) it is also not wise to start a new copyright file. Besides from the > fact that the Ubuntu maintainers might already have worked alot on it > and it would be a big waste of time, to just drop it and start from new, > you should honour their work beeing done and their packaging license. Sure, and previous work should be mentioned, no matter who did it: Ubuntu or my grand mother. Regarrds.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente