On 15/02/12 07:30, David Paleino wrote:
> no need to CC me when you write to pkg-osm-maint :). Also, I'm CCing you
> because I don't know whether you're subscribed or not.

No worries, I'll address pkg-osm-main in the future. Yes I'm subscribed.

> The only thing I could argue about is: do smaller commits. "updating debian
> files for 0.3-1 release" isn't very useful, and "git show" shows a bunch of
> seemingly unrelated changes (apart from the common fact that they happen in
> the 0.3-1 package).
> It would've been easier for me (or any other sponsor, I believe) if you did
> different commits, for example: "Update debian/rules for new upstream build
> system" and "Patch upstream build system to avoid running tests until jshlint 
> is
> packaged" would already have been better than the single-commit :)

Yep I agree. I'll do a better job of this next time.

> Usually, all non-trivial changes should be documented in debian/changelog:
> remember, "debcommit" is your friend (it's a wrapper around "$vcs commit", 
> that
> takes your last d/changelog entry as the commit message). It's not mandatory 
> to
> use it, but it's nice :)

I didn't know about that. I'll try it out next time.

> (I also usually do a "New upstream version" before anything else, right after
> the merge, which just adds a new debian/changelog stanza, but that's just a
> habit I have to ease diffs and reverts)

I don't see a problem with doing that in the future. Thanks for the tip.

> The package is nice, just the new patch is missing a DEP-3 header, but I'm
> uploading it nevertheless.

Right. I'll update it for the next release (if it is still needed by then).

> Thanks for your contribution!

Thanks for sponsoring it.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Pkg-osm-maint mailing list

Reply via email to