-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jan C. Nordholz wrote: > Why should I try to hide the normal course of development? I don't see
I agree that this *is* suboptimal. But it should not be part of normal development cycle to create extra revisions that you do not release, should it? IMHO it makes sense for some developer-only changelog, but the debian/changelog has gotten a file, which is shown to the users often and it might seem odd to them if versions therein do not exist. > the necessity to create extra loops (reformatting the changelog after > each intermediate package creation that is not uploaded) for me to jump Well you are right in this point. But I seem to develope my packages in another way then you. Cause i only start a new changelog entry, if i really uploaded something through my sponsor to the archive. > Hm, hard to tell. Oh, and for more real-world examples... Yeah yeah. I think you are right if you say, that it *is* used and that its okay to be used (even though i don't agree with it), but i would not recommend it either, cause I think there are a lot of sponsors that just will not upload such packages. This opinion results from the fact, that I have seen more people criticizing multiple changelog entries/versions for just a single release, then people that say that it is okay. - -Patrick -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG3Ft5TKIzE6LY9r8RAu3qAKCM3OKsROlvo/OU7nkjr/HnFDoO7gCfazg/ PcJpWBo4fjf4hwaz6aIx6/o= =wdo7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
