On 27/05/08 at 20:28 +0200, Bas Wijnen wrote: > > Quoting Charles: “In order to acknowledge the NMU, it would be necessary > > to revert the current work, apply the NMU patch, merge the reverted work > > and resolve the conflicts.” > > > > I think I wrote about the 3rd paragraph of 5.11.2, maybe I should have > > quoted it as well: “When a package has been NMUed, the maintainer should > > acknowledge it in the next upload. This makes clear that the changes > > were accepted in the maintainer's packaging, and that they aren't lost > > again. For this, you MUST first incorporate the changes into your > > packaging, by applying the patch that was sent. Make sure to include the > > NMU's changelog entry in your own changelog. This is important to allow > > the BTS version tracking to work.” > > > > [Emphasis on “must” added on purpose, that was meant to be my point.] > > Right. I agree that must is too strong there, but I'd fix it by adding > something like "as far as you want to keep them". You must indeed keep > the changelog entry, and it's good that this is emphasized IMO.
I made the following change to the DEP: (wdiff format)
When a package has been NMUed, the maintainer should acknowledge it in
the next upload. This makes clear that the changes were accepted in
the maintainer's packaging, and that they aren't lost again. For
this, you must first incorporate the changes into your [-packaging, by
applying the patch that was sent.-] {+package, as far as you want to
keep them.+} Make sure to include the NMU's changelog entry {+(not
just the line describing the changes)+} in your own changelog. This is
important to allow the BTS version tracking to work.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
