On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 04:43:41PM -0800, Justin Pettit wrote: > On Jan 12, 2012, at 4:14 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > > > As long as I'm suggesting changes, I know that I suggested using xxx > > in dates earlier, because we don't know when we're going to release in > > advance, but it makes Debian package builders unhappy, so I now think > > that it would be best to put real dates in debian/changelog even if > > they're wrong about release dates; they could at least reflect the > > time at which we wrote the entry. For NEWS, I'm happy to keep current > > practice. > > > How about this revised incremental. Does Debian complain if the > dates aren't strictly in order? The 1.3.0-1 date comes after the > 1.4.0-1 date, since it hasn't been set yet.
Thanks. I think that's an improvement. I don't think Debian cares about ordering. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
