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

Re: RFS: roxterm (updated package for experimental)



Tony Houghton <h@realh.co.uk> writes:

> On 09/01/11 14:45, Kan-Ru Chen wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Tony Houghton<h@realh.co.uk>  writes:
>>
>>>     I RFSd 1.20.1-1 about a week ago but it was overlooked and I received
>>> a patch this weekend so instead of pinging my previous RFS I created a
>>> new version and merged the debian/changelog entries for 1.20.1-1 through
>>> 1.20.3-1 as the earlier 1.20.* versions were not released. The latest
>>> version is to ensure that the package doesn't require po4a to build from
>>> a release tarball.
>>
>> I was checking this package.  I found that the changelog entries seem
>> messed up, in a way that old entries and new entries are mixed together.
>>
>> Please tidy up the changelogs then I will upload it.
>
> Do you mean the Debian changelog or upstream? I can't see a problem with
> either, please could you show an example of where entries have been
> mixed up.

The Debian changelog.

I downloaded the package from mentors.d.o, the most recent 6 changelog
entries are:

    roxterm (1.20.3-1) experimental; urgency=low
    roxterm (1.19.4-1) unstable; urgency=low
    roxterm (1.19.3-1) unstable; urgency=low
    roxterm (1.19.2-1) unstable; urgency=low
   *roxterm (1.18.5-3) unstable; urgency=low
    roxterm (1.19.1-1) unstable; urgency=low

Apparently only the 1.18.5-3 is currently in sid.  Debdiff also
indicates the other entries are newly introduced.

Cheers,
Kanru
-- 
A badly written book is only a blunder. A bad translation of a good
book is a crime.
                -- Gilbert Highet


Reply to: