> On Tue, 3 Feb 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > [snip] > > If Ian wants anyway to modify dpkg-parsechangelog or > > dpkg-genchanges, > > then the proposal (already discarded) to have a pre-parsing at build > > time, revealing the bug numbers to be closed, could be > > re-considered. > > I don't think it's necessary to reconsider this. The reason why we > decided to have only `dinstall' check for the "closes:" patterns is > that a) we don't want to implement the parsing procedure on both sides > (dpkg-genchanges and dinstall) and b) it's easier to keep the new > upload procedure up-to-date in case any changes are necessary in the > future. (It will probably take some time until all developers have > upgraded to the latest dpkg-dev package.)
There are two reasons I can think of at the moment for putting the parsing into dpkg-parsechangelog. Firstly, dpkg-parsechangelog is currently the only program which needs to parse changlog text at all. dinstall just has to cut-and-paste it. I think that adding parsing of this data somewhere else is a doubtful idea. Secondly, the developer gets to choose their own changelog format (though few have actually done so). dpkg-parsechangelog is responsible for normalising this format. If we do the parsing there then we can change the user interface (what the developer has to do) without changing dinstall or requiring the change to be global. Both of these fundamentally stem from the fact that dpkg-parsechangelog is for parsing changelogs. Ian.
