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

Re: DEP1: Clarifying policies and workflows for Non Maintainer Uploads (NMUs)

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 08:01:27PM +0200, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
> On 27/05/2008, Bas Wijnen wrote:
> > The proposal is to use the DELAYED queue as the default way to do an
> > NMU.  This means in particular that the code is already finished when
> > the mail about the NMU is sent to the BTS.  So there is no reason to
> > allow changes to the patch after this mail; if you need them, cancel
> > the NMU and upload an other one instead (sending the new patch to the
> > BTS).
> I'm talking about ACK'ing a previously-uploaded-and-accepted NMU in a
> future upload.

Oh, sorry, I didn't look up your reference and thought you were talking
about including the patch in the BTS.

> Quoting Charles: “In order to acknowledge the NMU, it would be necessary
> to revert the current work, apply the NMU patch, merge the reverted work
> and resolve the conflicts.”
> I think I wrote about the 3rd paragraph of 5.11.2, maybe I should have
> quoted it as well: “When a package has been NMUed, the maintainer should
> acknowledge it in the next upload. This makes clear that the changes
> were accepted in the maintainer's packaging, and that they aren't lost
> again. For this, you MUST first incorporate the changes into your
> packaging, by applying the patch that was sent. Make sure to include the
> NMU's changelog entry in your own changelog. This is important to allow
> the BTS version tracking to work.”
> [Emphasis on “must” added on purpose, that was meant to be my point.]

Right.  I agree that must is too strong there, but I'd fix it by adding
something like "as far as you want to keep them".  You must indeed keep
the changelog entry, and it's good that this is emphasized IMO.


I encourage people to send encrypted e-mail (see http://www.gnupg.org).
If you have problems reading my e-mail, use a better reader.
Please send the central message of e-mails as plain text
   in the message body, not as HTML and definitely not as MS Word.
Please do not use the MS Word format for attachments either.
For more information, see http://pcbcn10.phys.rug.nl/e-mail.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: