Bug#704442: unblock: devscripts/2.12.7 (pre-approval dch --bpo fix)
On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 15:43 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-04-01 at 15:41 +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > In the current version of devscripts in wheezy, when invoking dch --bpo,
> > generates a changelog like this one:
> > devscripts (2.12.6~bpo60+1) squeeze-backports; urgency=low
> >
> > It should of course use this instead:
> > devscripts (2.12.6~bpo70+1) wheezy-backports; urgency=low
[...]
> Have you asked the devscripts maintainers? That's not the sort of change
> I'd personally be happy with unless the maintainers had signed it off.
> (I realise it's now in collab-maint, but my understanding was that the
> intention was to make it easier to contribute rather than easier to
> upload.)
I've just been pointed to the discussion in #703633, CCed to
-backports@ldo. It would have been helpful if you'd mentioned that in
the first place... That thread also suggests that the maintainers would
rather keep unstable's dch generating backports for squeeze until the
wheezy release has actually happened. In that case, this would need to
wait until after the release.
> -my %bpo_dists = ( 60, 'squeeze' );
> -my $latest_bpo_dist = '60';
> +my %bpo_dists = ( 70, 'wheezy' );
> +my $latest_bpo_dist = '70';
>
> The first of those changes is wrong for as long as uploads to
> squeeze-backports are supported. Apparently my earlier assumption was
> wrong. :-(
Specifically, %bpo_dists should be "( 60, 'squeeze', 70, 'wheezy' )".
dch will mostly do the right thing with your suggested change due to
being smarter than the average bear (apologies if the reference doesn't
translate outside of English-speaking countries) but there are some
cases where it won't without both being in the hash.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: