Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Maybe you can specify what problem you are trying to solve. > > That's a fair question.
And I didn't really answer it directly. Here's another try: I'm trying to know that what I put into the changelog is going to be machine-parseable for all the structural information that can reasonably be parsed from it. Sure, the conventional way is to use 'debchange' with appropriate options. What if I'm using a different tool? What if I'm editing the changelog by hand? Then I have the options of either "generate it however I think best, regardless of what parsers may expect", or "don't ever use any tool but debchange". The latter is (for me) unacceptable, and the former is irresponsible. All the answers I've had so far indicate that there *is* no specification for developer names within a changelog entry, and that any format at all is allowed so long as the loose definition in Policy is followed. My issue with that is that it leads to this information being recorded in many, mutually-incompatible ways (which was, I believe, the existing state when the format was proposed), with no simple guide of how one *should* put the information in to be a good Debian citizen. -- \ "If you continue running Windows, your system may become | `\ unstable." —Microsoft, Windows 95 BSOD message | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
