On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 05:12:22PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote: > I can. > You wrote that you have "to list each change in the upstream > changelog" to know which bug can be declared as closed. Right?
That is what i wrote, but is not what i meant: it have a difference meaning if you take it out of the context, but my english is not so good to commit that i explained my self. I'll rephrase: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ You people told me that: - If i make a change to a package i've to list my changes in the package changelog (Matt Zimmerman, no one ever objected this). - If i build a new upstream, i've to list each change in the upstream changelog that let me declare a bug as closed; change that does not refer to the Debian package (but to the original upstream), and that i did not applied as part of my package working (because it was applied from the upstream). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The second contradict the first, and does not follow what stated in policy about debian chagelog file (13.7 an 5.3 of policy). > Do you think that users should list "each change in the upstream > changelog" to know how the bug they submitted as been closed? If you mean "read" by the word "list", of course i do. First came the upstream changelog, then the Debian one. > So the only way you have to demonstrate it is to act as a child? So the only way to confute my observation is to bring childish arguments to the discussion? > You have an easy solution: follow the 4. of the Debian social > contract ( http://www.debian.org/social_contract ). I'm already doing it in many ways and, untill now, no one has conviced me that this would be a real improovement. have a nice day. -- Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis | Elegant or ugly code as well aliases: Luca ^De [A-Z][A-Za-z\-]*[iy]'\?s$ | as fine or rude sentences have Luca, a wannabe ``Good guy''. | something in common: they local LANG="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" | don't depend on the language.