Bug#96597: changing policy requirements for debian native packages to _MUST_
On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 11:28:55PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> dh_installchangelogs (debhelper-3.4.11) currently bails if one attempts
> to install a non-debian changelog to
> /usr/share/doc/<package>/changelog.gz in a debian-native package.
Ok. I think maybe that's a bug, but I'm willing to be proven wrong.
> Joey Hess has mentioned that various tools expect the changelog.gz
> for debian-native packages to parsable as debian-style changelogs.
What tools? I would definitely say that any such tool has a bug.
> Given this expectation, one of two things should be done; either
> policy should be changed to explicitly allow multiple changelogs for
> debian-native packages, or explicitly disallow more than 1.
"Given this expectation", sure, but I *don't* give that expectation.
If changelog.Debian.gz exists, that should be considered the Debian
changelog. If it doesn't, then changelog.gz should be considered the
Debian changelog. A tool which doesn't work this way should be
considered broken, IMO.
> The current interpretation of it (section 13.8), for debian-native
> packages, reads as "if the package only has 1 changelog, put it in
That seems reasonable, and meets my definition above (there's no
changelog.Debian.gz, so changelog.gz is the Debian changelog). Note
that any Debian package _must_ have a Debian changelog, so, if there's
only one changelog, it must be the Debian changelog.
> This should be changed to something like:
> "If the package is a debian-native package, the changelog installed in
> /usr/share/doc/<package>/changelog.gz MUST be the debian changelog.
No. Current policy seems fine to me.
> The exact quote from the current policy is:
> "If the package has only one changelog which is used both as the Debian
> changelog and the upstream one because there is no separate upstream
> maintainer then that changelog should usually be installed as
> /usr/share/doc/package/changelog.gz; if there is a separate upstream
> maintainer, but no upstream changelog, then the Debian changelog should
> still be called changelog.Debian.gz."
Frankly, as far as I'm concerned, if something is a Debian-native
package, it should only have one changelog. If there's any reason for
maintaining two, then that probably counts as sufficient justification
for NOT creating a Debian-native package! A proposal which made this
into policy might have my support. The current proposal does not.
In other words, I doubt if I approve of what you seem to be trying to
do in the first place. Although, without more details, it's hard to
In any case, the argument for the current proposal seems to be that
existing tools make assumptions that do not match what policy says.
Unless and until an effort to fix those tools fails, I think we should
leave policy as it stands. Especially since policy has been frozen
for months now.
So, I guess I have two questions: 1. What are these tools that joeyh
refers to, and why can't they be fixed? 2. Why the heck are you
trying to make a Debian-native package with two changelogs? Without
reasonable answers to both of these questions, I'm afraid I'll have to
oppose the proposal.
Chris Waters | Pneumonoultra- osis is too long
email@example.com | microscopicsilico- to fit into a single
or firstname.lastname@example.org | volcaniconi- standalone haiku