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

Bug#96597: changing policy requirements for debian native packages to _MUST_

On Mon, Mar 04, 2002 at 08:42:11PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:

> Policy states that history should not be rewritten; ie, past changelog
> entries should remain as they were.  What happens when maintainership of
> a package moves upstream?

Aargh, why should anything happen?  Is the package suddenly specific
to Debian?  And if not, why on earth should it be a Debian-native

As upstream maintainer for WMRack, I document my changes in ./CHANGES.
As Debian maintainer for WMRack, I document my changes in
debian/changelog.  I see no reason to treat WMRack differently, than,
say, WMMail, for which I'm only the Debian maintainer.  Neither WMRack
nor WMMail is in any way, shape, or form, Debian-specific.  Thus,
neither one is a Debian-native package.

Is it more work for me that way?  Well, technically, yes.  I probably
spend *dozens* of seconds adding in a "new upstream release" entry in
debian/changelog after I've made a new upstream release.  I think I
can spare that many seconds.  And, if I find a debian-specific problem
(say, bad build-depends), it saves me *and everyone else* time and
trouble if I just release a new debian version, and don't bother to
release a new upstream version.  (Why should I?)  Plus, it leaves
everyone less confused.

Chris Waters           |  Pneumonoultra-        osis is too long
xtifr@debian.org       |  microscopicsilico-    to fit into a single
or xtifr@speakeasy.net |  volcaniconi-          standalone haiku

Reply to: