On 2006-11-07 10:55 +0000, Neil Williams wrote: > >> Actually, I really like this last proposal, in that it is the most > >> honest: it keeps the Debian changelog untouched, while allowing all > >> the standard tools to work unchanged as far as the changelog is > >> concerned. > > > >This sounds plausible to me too. > > > > Perhaps I am missing something but what's wrong with a simple patch > >to be applied to the changelog? Patches for everything was the > >original cocept. So we have a debian changelog and then the emdebian > >diff adds emdebian info to it. > > Consider this timeline: > > > Debian (Buildd) Emdebian > ------- ------ --------- > 1.2-1 > 1.2-1em1 > 1.2-1em2 > 1.2-2 (FTBFS) > 1.2-2.1 (NMU) > 1.2-2.1em1 > 1.2-2.1em2 > 1.3-1 > 1.3-1em1
right - I thought that might be the problem. > The patches to insert the emN entries into debian/changelog in time > order will get more and more complex as time goes by because we'll > still be patching the 1.2-1em1 changes into the debian/changelog in > version 2.8-2em5! (Debian maintainers aren't going to be including our > changelog entries in their uploads - or was that the plan?) For anything we succeed in pushing upstream then yes it gets included, but under the normal version numbers. > It makes for a very confusing .em.diff.gz - very difficult to follow. > Just as the debian changelog is separate from the upstream changelog, > it looks a better solution - at this stage - to have a separate > changelog for emdebian. OK. But the tradeoff of that is having to change the build tools, which we were seeing if we could avoid. OK, so we get a long diff over time, but it is nice and simple. I don't feel strongly either way. Clarity is important. So is avoiding debian tool changes that we can't push upstream. > >I think lintian has config for tests to skip by default etc. Setting > >these for emdebian use shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps lintian could > >do it automatically when it sees .emdebs, but we can also just teach > >developers to set them manually in a HOWTO. > > Agreed. > > >That is indeed what we are trying to do. But writing down some of the > >stuff in this thread to remind us why we chose things might be a good > >idea as we go along. Obvsiouly nothing is set even in plasticene yet. > > I'm composing a "summary" for the list at the moment. I've asked Julian > if he wouldn't mind subscribing to debian-embedded and we'll go from > there. OK, great. They'll be wanting that after this sudden mid-conversation influx. Wookey -- Aleph One Ltd, Bottisham, CAMBRIDGE, CB5 9BA, UK Tel +44 (0) 1223 811679 work: http://www.aleph1.co.uk/ play: http://wookware.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
