[Proposal to change how we do stuff]
Hi!
Currently, when working with the changelog, we seem to in the team to have our
own specific style, a style that requires to adapt the changelog from the style
generated with usually recommended tools like dch and uupdate.
Every time I work around a tool
On Thursday 03 July 2008, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> So please. Let us adopt the way dch does it so we don't have to change and
> adapt the changelog all the time. This also have the advantage that doing
> automatic processing, dch can do the changelog handling instead of own
> scripts.
We should at l
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 06:04:36PM +0200, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> [Proposal to change how we do stuff]
>
> Hi!
>
> Currently, when working with the changelog, we seem to in the team to have
> our
> own specific style, a style that requires to adapt the changelog from the
> style
> generated wit
On Thursday 03 July 2008 20:46:00 Ana Guerrero wrote:
> > Now speak up - and by the way, I will consider this as accepted if no one
> > speaks against it within the next weeks or so.
>
> This is not a nice way of handling stuff... so I send a mail with big
> changes the week you are off on holida
Hi,
Thursday 03 July 2008, Ana Guerrero rašė:
> I do not care at all about using +++ Name or [ Name ] but when more than a
> person have worked in the package I like uploading it as a team upload as
> we have done until now. So not ok about changing that.
However, current practise is not consisten
Hi,
Alle giovedì 03 luglio 2008, Modestas Vainius ha scritto:
> Thursday 03 July 2008, Ana Guerrero rašė:
> > I do not care at all about using +++ Name or [ Name ] but when more than
> > a person have worked in the package I like uploading it as a team upload
> > as we have done until now. So not
On Thu, Jul 03, 2008 at 09:12:18PM +0200, Sune Vuorela wrote:
>
> On Thursday 03 July 2008 20:46:00 Ana Guerrero wrote:
>
> > > Now speak up - and by the way, I will consider this as accepted if no one
> > > speaks against it within the next weeks or so.
> >
> > This is not a nice way of handling
On Thursday 03 July 2008, Modestas Vainius wrote:
> Most of these tasks can be automated by dch if the standard layout is used.
> However, dch behaviour depends on having the name of the real maintainer in
> the changelog maintainer field to transform personal entry to the team
> entry.
So what is
Hi,
Friday 04 July 2008, Matthew Rosewarne rašė:
> I was thinking perhaps that a few team names/addresses could be specified
> in the devscripts conf. dch would always use multimaint mode for those
> addresses and preserve the team address at the bottom of the changelog
> entry.
>
> Any other ide
So, we have in the Qt/Debian team the classic Debian problem of 2 developers
not getting along. It started on IRC some time ago and lately has spilled
on this mailing list. It has been there for some time now, but it grow a lot
with the past KDE3/KDE4 in lenny issue.
It is killing my fun of worki
Hi,
IMHO, I prefer dch multimaintainer mode implementation.
by the way, we can start to use this scheme manually, no need to wait for dch
changes.
package (1.2.3-4) experimental; urgency=low
[ Joe User ]
* doing foo
* doing bar
[ Jane Hacker ]
* Something third
* Something fourth
11 matches
Mail list logo
