Le Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 12:52:22PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum a écrit : > On 06/04/09 at 19:48 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: > > Le Mon, Apr 06, 2009 at 12:13:45PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog a écrit : > > > On Mon, 06 Apr 2009, Charles Plessy wrote: > > > > I think that it is a good concept, but the linian warning has probably > > > > a good > > > > reason to exist. For instance, if a bug is closed as part of a "Team > > > > upload", > > > > won't the BTS expect a NMU acknowledgement anyway? > > > > > > IIRC that concept died when we introduced version tracking so it should > > > cause any problem. Bugs are always version closed (and no more tagged > > > fixed/fixed-in-nmu). > > > > Good :) Does it mean that the Developers Reference must be updated? > > No, that's still correct. If you don't include the changelog entry > fixing the bug, then the BTS' version tracking will be confused, and > think that your version still has the bug.
Aah thank you, that is clearer: I thought that it was meaning that it is still needed to re-iterate the Closes: command. So if we assume that in the case of “team uploads” the changes would be commited in the teams repository, as opposed to NMUs were the diff is sent to the BTS, it would definitely be useful to have the Debian tools to understand that it is correct that the person signing the changelog is not listed in the Uploaders: not the Maintainer: field. Would it be wrong to use the “ * QA upload” special first line, or is it better to reserve it to the QA team ? Have a nice day, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
