[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFS: fdclone (updated package)



2010/12/2 Elías Alejandro <ealmdz@gmail.com>:
>> Firstly, why does the package need an empty file at
>> /etc/fdclone/fd2rc.siteconfig?
>>
> This version is a fdclone customization for Debian
> come since 2002 and it was made by a DD.

Ok, that still doesn't tell me why an empty file needs to exist.

Since it is empty, surely it has no effect on the package.

I would suggest it should be removed when upgrading from 3.00j-2 or
earlier if it is still empty.

>> Secondly, the postrm should only remove that file, not all of /etc/fdclone/.
>>
> Done.

Minor nitpick, the -r option means recursively remove a directory.
Since you are removing a file, no need to use it :)

>> Thirdly, your changelog entries are not particularly useful to users,
>> you might want to read devref 6.3:
>
> I've tried to improve it. be more specific.

Ok, here is how I would have written it:

fdclone (3.00j-2) unstable; urgency=low

  * Fix purging package, properly remove the configuration file
  * Fix some spelling errors in the manual page

 -- Elías Alejandro Año Mendoza <ealmdz@gmail.com>  Sat, 27 Nov 2010
20:59:31 -0500

In comparison to yours, it doesn't mention the following irrelevant detail:

lintian/piuparts - just tools to help you find problems, not things to
be silenced, nor something users need to be made aware of.

patch names - users don't care about that

debian/postrm - users usually don't need to know about maintainer scripts

The devref section I linked to has lots more tips for changelog
entries, it is a good idea to read it.

-- 
bye,
pabs

http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise


Reply to: