Julien Cristau <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 09:23:05 +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
>> I know that in the long term you're in favor of moving the changelog in >> the package metadata and I agree with this plan. But IMO we must find >> an interim solution in the mean time. > Whatever solution ends up being chosen in the end (whether it's dropping > the binNMU changelog, moving it to a separate file, or moving the whole > changelog away, I don't hugely care), it's too late to make these > changes for wheezy IMO. My gut instinct is to agree. Given the incomplete multiarch conversion, it seems like we should just do a final consistency binNMU on all affected packages right before the wheezy release so that they all match (I assume it's possible to do that? if not, we could do a sourceful upload/NMU through testing-proposed-updates) and call it good enough for wheezy. Stable updates are unlikely to have this problem, since I believe binNMUs are very rare inside stable. Doing new feature and design work in dpkg at this point in the release cycle doesn't seem like a good idea. I think using the separate file approach makes sense for wheezy+1 if the dpkg maintainers don't think that the move to package metadata will be done in time. -- Russ Allbery ([email protected]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
