Hi Sean,

Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> writes:

> Hello,
>
> On Tue 17 Dec 2024 at 02:08am -08, Xiyue Deng wrote:
>
>> The symlink should have been removed at 927b478, and my local built
>> package does not seem to have any symlink to CHANGELOG.org anymore.  Can
>> you pull and retry?
>
> Hmm, sorry.
>
> But your install(1) invocation doesn't work, I think?  It doesn't get
> installed to the /usr/share/doc.  I think you need to be copying into
> debian/tmp/usr/share/doc/dap-mode/.
>

Looks like I confused changelog.Debian and changelog.  Should be fixed
now.

>> IMHO treating Org mode documents as plain text is losing formatting
>> information.
>
> But we're not doing that :)  The lack of a file extension does not imply
> there is no particular format.
>
>> Similarly for markdown, Org mode files are plain text but not quite,
>> as there are formatting information that are used to add more visual
>> effect compared to plain text, and preserving them is good.  The
>> policy supports NEWS.html and changelog.html.  Why not also treat
>> CHANGELOG.{org,md} as a supported changelog format directly?  This
>> saves maintainer time as well as preserve formatting information: if
>> one installs CHANGELOG.org as changelog and would like to preserve
>> formatting information, one may have to patch the file with `-*- mode:
>> org -*-' cookie for Emacs, or maybe other treatments for other
>> readers/editors, while CHANGELOG.org works OOTB and I doubt upstream
>> would accept patches adding the cookies because CHANGELOG.org is
>> working fine and changing the file name is the decision made by the
>> Debian maintainer.  This puts Debian maintainer in a lose-lose
>> position: having to do extra work, and changes may not be accepted
>> upstream.
>
> Maybe, but that's an issue to raise on Debian Policy mailing list or
> bugtracker, not here.
>

Right.  Will follow up there.

>> I found /usr/share/common-licenses contains a very limited list of
>> DFSG-compatible licenses.  Is there any proposal to extend the list so
>> that we don't have to include the full text for DFSG-compatible licenses
>> anymore?
>
> Yeah, It's been discussed numerous times.  Look in the debian-policy
> list archives.
>

Thanks for the pointer!

> -- 
> Sean Whitton

-- 
Regards,
Xiyue Deng

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to