Hi Iain, Thanks for the feedback. I've always associated metadata changes with Debian, without realizing there were different way in which the metadata was implemented. I'll watch out for it in future.
I'm also still getting my head round the different way in which patches are created. I'll be sure to take in the contents of the link you posted :) Chris On 31 January 2011 10:08, Iain Lane <la...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > tags 611576 + confirmed upstream > severity 611576 wishlist > forwarded 611576 https://github.com/jpobst/Pinta/pull/44 > thanks > > Hiya, > > On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 08:48:32PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> Package: pinta >> Version: 0.4+dfsg-2 >> Severity: minor >> >> Originally reported at >> https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/pinta/+bug/704491 >> >> The software centre teaser for Pinta is "Create and edit images and >> photographs". This is misleading because it is not possible to create >> photographs using Pinta. The sentence should therefore be changed. >> >> While this is obviously only a very minor issue, the focus in the Natty >> cycle >> is quality and I think this is so easily fixable that we should do it. >> >> The patch changes the comment to 'An easy way to create and edit images", >> as >> images can cover drawings and photographs as well. >> > > Thanks for your bug and patch, which I've forwarded upstream and which > we'll therefore get with the next release if it is merged. > > I've got a couple of pointers for your next Debian report that will > make maintainers more happy. :-) > > Your diff contains some changes which are undesirable. If you take a > look at it, there's an automated 'debian-changes' patch. You can see > (by looking at the debian/source/format file) that this is a "3.0 > (quilt)" package. That means that the correct way to patch the > /upstream/ source is by a quilt patch. Details at [0]. A direct diff > of the xdg/pinta.desktop file would also have been perfectly fine. > > Your changelog has an Ubuntu version and distribution. This is a > Debian bug report, so that is inappropriate. You should have used > 0.6-2 (or not provided a changelog entry, since we tend to manage > those in git semi-automatically anyway) and unstable/experimental as > the distribution. > > In general, changes to /desktop file/, as opposed to package > (debian/control) descriptions are best dealt with upstream. They are > minor issues that aren't really worth a distribution patch (and all of > the associated maintenance) — maintainers may not mind forwarding your > patches for you, but it might be more efficient for you to just > contact upstream with your suggested new wording yourself. > > Just some thoughts. > > Cheers, > Iain > > [0] http://pkg-perl.alioth.debian.org/howto/quilt.html >
