Hi Guido,
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:46, Guido Loupias <
guidoloupias@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/11/10 Sandro Tosi <
matrixhasu@gmail.com>
> The changes I introduced in 0.5.5-1 and 0.5.5-2 have been applied upstream.
> So in essence there are no changes (except for that 1 patch) to the debian
> revision with respect to the upstream version. Hence the short list of
> changes.
> The revised -1 revision wouldn't upload after I editted the changelog. It
> said there
> was nothing to upload because there were no changes.
what tools give you error? dput/dupload or mentors.d.n? if dput,
remove *.upload, if mentors remove the previous upload first.
> Am I understanding correctly then that in order for a revision to be updated
> the previous revision has to be in the debian archive first? I recall two
> other
> mentors telling me that it is good practice to increment the debian revision
> even if the archive only made it to mentors and never to the debian
> archives.
Personally, I'm strong against their suggestion: having a new revision
for every single upload to mentors for even small fix requested by the
sponsor is really annoying and can generate confusion to the end users
reading the changelog: what if the ask "what changes from the latest
version I have installed on the system" and found 6 revisions each for
"added watch file"+"removed commented line from debian/rules"+"added a
',' char to short description" or so is really really ugly.
this is my opinion, their and mine being technical correct.