Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 1:03 PM Jonathan Carter wrote: > On 2020/10/06 17:53, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > > Thanks for all the comments and improvements people proposed. > > > > Ondřej merged my MR last night, so it's now part of policy. > Great! > > Yay! Thanks! > > -Jonathan > > -- > ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) > ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage > ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org > ⠈⠳⣄ Debian, the universal operating system. > >
Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
On 2020/10/06 17:53, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > Thanks for all the comments and improvements people proposed. > > Ondřej merged my MR last night, so it's now part of policy. Yay! Thanks! -Jonathan -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org ⠈⠳⣄ Debian, the universal operating system.
Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
On 2020-09-28 08 h 40, Ondrej Novy wrote: > Hi, > > po 28. 9. 2020 v 2:08 odesílatel Louis-Philippe Véronneau > napsal: > >> Hi! >> >> I am proposing a minor addition to the DPT policy to try to make the use >> of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog more consistent. The full diff can be >> found here [1]. >> > > I agree with this proposal but please change the wording a bit as > per rfc2119 :) > Thanks for all the comments and improvements people proposed. Ondřej merged my MR last night, so it's now part of policy. Cheers, -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
Hi, po 28. 9. 2020 v 2:08 odesílatel Louis-Philippe Véronneau napsal: > Hi! > > I am proposing a minor addition to the DPT policy to try to make the use > of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog more consistent. The full diff can be > found here [1]. > I agree with this proposal but please change the wording a bit as per rfc2119 :) -- Best regards Ondřej Nový
Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 08:07:29PM -0400, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > The problem this tries to solves is inconsistent use of UNRELEASED in > debian/changelog. Some people do not use it at all, and it can make > working on team packages harder. > > Indeed, if you try to modify a package, if people don't use UNRELEASED, > you first need to check if the current VCS version has been uploaded to > the archive or not. This complicates the life of people doing mass > updates, as they can't rely on packages with `unstable` having been > uploaded. I just want to point people towards the fact that the Janitor's is now being clever about recognizing whether a package is using `gbp dch` (which I believe is the case you refer to when you say that UNRELEASED is not used), or changelog entires are added whenever a change is done. That said, I acknoledge that it makes sense to converge on a single solution for the whole team, and honestly I don't have much of a strong preference towards either one. -- regards, Mattia Rizzolo GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`. More about me: https://mapreri.org : :' : Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'` Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `- signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
On Mon, 28 Sep 2020 at 01:08, Louis-Philippe Véronneau wrote: > > Hi! > > I am proposing a minor addition to the DPT policy to try to make the use > of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog more consistent. The full diff can be > found here +1. Seems to match what we do in the Perl team. Thanks, Nick
Re: Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
Hi, El dom., 27 de sep. de 2020 a la(s) 21:08, Louis-Philippe Véronneau ( po...@debian.org) escribió: > Hi! > > I am proposing a minor addition to the DPT policy to try to make the use > of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog more consistent. The full diff can be > found here [1]. > > The problem this tries to solves is inconsistent use of UNRELEASED in > debian/changelog. Some people do not use it at all, and it can make > working on team packages harder. > > Indeed, if you try to modify a package, if people don't use UNRELEASED, > you first need to check if the current VCS version has been uploaded to > the archive or not. This complicates the life of people doing mass > updates, as they can't rely on packages with `unstable` having been > uploaded. > > This be can seen for example in the latest batch of updates by onovy, > where new versions of a package were made instead of marking changes as > addition to a yet to be released version, because some packages were > marked `unstable` but hadn't been uploaded. > > I don't think it's a lot to ask and will surely make team contributions > more pleasant :) > > Yes, +1 for this please. Cheers, eamanu Cheers, > > [1]: > > https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/-/merge_requests/15 > > -- > ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ > ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau > ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org > ⠈⠳⣄ > >
Policy proposal: Consistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog
Hi! I am proposing a minor addition to the DPT policy to try to make the use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog more consistent. The full diff can be found here [1]. The problem this tries to solves is inconsistent use of UNRELEASED in debian/changelog. Some people do not use it at all, and it can make working on team packages harder. Indeed, if you try to modify a package, if people don't use UNRELEASED, you first need to check if the current VCS version has been uploaded to the archive or not. This complicates the life of people doing mass updates, as they can't rely on packages with `unstable` having been uploaded. This be can seen for example in the latest batch of updates by onovy, where new versions of a package were made instead of marking changes as addition to a yet to be released version, because some packages were marked `unstable` but hadn't been uploaded. I don't think it's a lot to ask and will surely make team contributions more pleasant :) Cheers, [1]: https://salsa.debian.org/python-team/tools/python-modules/-/merge_requests/15 -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
