On Mon, Apr 09, 2007, Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt wrote: > Loïc Minier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > I don't want changelog entries to be lost as they represent actual > > uploads; hence, in the past, I've merged changelog entries between > > experimental and unstable so that all experimental and unstable uploads > > appear in the changelog of the latest version; this is sometimes weird > > as it can shows two versions doing the same set of changes when we did > > them separately. > Which I think is a problem. I believe that changelog entries should only > be merged when the related chages were merged. There is seldom more > development on a stable (ie, uploaded to unstable) branch of a package > than on the experimental version, so I think a useful way to handle > this problem is to merge all changes made to the unstable version into > the experimental version (and include the fitting changelog entries). If > a package is moved from experimental to unstable, it should be done with > svn mv [1].
So you want to keep experimental uploads in the unstable changelog? Or do we edit the changelog after the svn mv to create a new unstable version? > I firmly believe that the changelog should only reflect development done > on the branch that is actually uploaded, and not contain what was done > to other branches. Remember, we do non-linear development, but > changelogs only provide a linear way to represent changes, so we should > document the actual line of development in the changelog of the package > that we are uploading. Sure, how does the proposal I made contradict the above? -- Loïc Minier "For subalterns, saying something intelligent is as risky as saying something stupid." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
