On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 12:15:52PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote: > OoO En cette fin de matin?e radieuse du samedi 25 octobre 2008, vers > 11:07, Alexander B?rger <acfbuerger@googlemail.com> disait : > > >> ... "Debian" changelog, not upstream ... > > > Hmm. I do not have an upstream changelog, and all previous > > debian/changelog entries have the same problem. So what would you > > suggest to do: > > > * Move all debian/changelog entries actually describing upstream changes > > to a new upstream-changelog and replace it with "new upstream version" > > for all upstream versions (0.1 -- 0.19) in debian/changelog? > > * Keep the existing debian/changelog entries and start the upstream > > changelog now? > > > And, as adding a new upstream changelog would mean that the orig.tar.gz > > changes: > > > * Fix it in the next version (0.20) once there are upstream code > > changes? > > * Fix it now, keep version 0.19 and hide the new upstream changelog > > until 0.20-1? > > * Add the new upstream changelog via debian's diff.gz? That seems odd. > > * Make 0.20 and 0.20-1. What would then be the upstream changelog > > entry? > > No, no, you don't have to maintain yourself upstream changelog (you = as > Debian package maintainer). But he is also the upstream maintainer :) That's where his confusion comes from - he is asking how to combine the idea of an upstream changelog with the idea of a Debian changelog :) Let's start with the disclaimer that I am not a Debian developer :) Alexander, IMHO the best thing you could do in this particular case is, indeed, to release a new upstream version, 0.20, with a changelog included, and then package it for Debian with a "New upstream release" log for that particular version. The changelog you put in the 0.20 upstream tarball should include all the changes for previous releases - maybe just copied over from the Debian changelog. This will be useful to others who try to use fig2sxd on other OS's, not just Debian :) After you release the 0.20 upstream version of fig2sxd, make a new Debian package for 0.20-1. If there were other changes you did *to the Debian packaging* in the 0.19-1 version that this RFS is for (it seems you bumped Standards-Version at least), you may keep that changelog entry - though there are Debian developers who would frown upon changelog entries for versions that have never been uploaded, there are others who like the idea of keeping track of the changes one at a time. However, if you decide to keep the 0.19-1 Debian changelog entry, you should remove the actual description of the upstream changes and replace it with "New upstream version". IMHO it might be better to just skip 0.19-1 in the Debian changelog - change the top line to fig2xsd (0.20-1) so that it seems that you made the changes there :) And, IMHO, no, you should not modify earlier Debian changelog entries! Just leave them as they are - yes, there will be some duplication between the upstream and the Debian changelogs now, but in time, with new upstream versions of fig2sxd, it will become insignificant. Again, all of this is just my opinion, and IANADD :) G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev roam@ringlet.net roam@cnsys.bg roam@FreeBSD.org PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553 I am jealous of the first word in this sentence.
Attachment:
pgpcuABeWMQxS.pgp
Description: PGP signature