Re: RFS: whohas (new upstream)
On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Jonathan Wiltshire
<debian@jwiltshire.org.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 03:26:45PM +0900, Paul Wise wrote:
>> > I've also included a NEWS file detailing the patches
>> > that are still active.
>>
>> I don't think that is an appropriate use of NEWS.Debian, documenting
>> them in the patch headers should be enough. You might want to check
>> policy/devref about this though.
>
> I searched through policy and couldn't find mention of how to handle
> this situation, where the user should care about Debian-specific patches
> because they change the application's behaviour. Pretty trivially in
> this case, but I still think it's important to be able to find this
> information without needing to get the package source and understand
> how it goes together.
>
> Devref mentions NEWS.Debian as a changelog supplement: "This is the
> preferred means to let the user know [...] changes in a package" [1]. I
> didn't use README.Debian as the same paragraph seems to discourage this,
> but if you think it would be better I will change it.
>
> Clarification of these files would be appreciated :-)
>
> [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.html#bpp-news-debian
I interpret that as being the changes since earlier versions of the
package, rather than changes to the upstream source code.
>> You don't specify which version of the GPL the packaging is under.
>
> Fixed (has some guidance on this changed since last time? if so I missed
> it, sorry).
Nope, I probably just missed it last time.
>> Listing all the distros supported may not be a good idea because this
>> will change over time and thus add work for those translating Debian
>> package descriptions.
>
> With my user's hat on again, I'd really like to know what it supports
> while looking at the package prospectively, but I agree I don't know how
> often the list might change.
>
> Can you suggest a better place (I thought maybe README|NEWS.Debian), or would
> it be sufficient to just make it clear that this list might be slightly
> out of date?
After reading thijs' response I conceed the importance of the distro
list is higher than very slightly more work for translators.
--
bye,
pabs
http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Reply to: