Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Thiemo Seufer writes (Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog): Policy violations are RC by definition. This is pernicious nonsense. Asking whether a bug is release critical is the same as asking whether it would be better to release with the bug, or to discard the package and/or delay the release. There are plenty of situations where a violation of a stricture in the policy manual is not a good reason for ditching the package or delaying the release. Furthermore, lest you say `but the policy manual says ...': whether a bug is release critical is determined by the release team (usually via their release policy), not by the policy manual. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
* Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-26 00:43]: On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 09:01:24AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: * Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 23:45]: | Maintainer: Debian/IA64 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Could you please explain to me why having Changed-By as a mailing list in this case (a binary NMU done by an autobuilder) is problematic? You may have good reasons for thinking Changed-By should list a real person, but I fail to understand it. Please explain we the meaning of person. By person I mean an entity with two legs, two arms, a trunk, and, normally, a thinking head, a member of the homo sapiens species. Given the stage of evolutionary progress of these entities, they should have no problem understanding the paragraph I wrote above. [Bastian, take it easy, it is just a joke :-)] -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Sat, Nov 26, 2005 at 10:53:16AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: * Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-26 00:43]: On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 09:01:24AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: * Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 23:45]: | Maintainer: Debian/IA64 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Could you please explain to me why having Changed-By as a mailing list in this case (a binary NMU done by an autobuilder) is problematic? You may have good reasons for thinking Changed-By should list a real person, but I fail to understand it. Please explain we the meaning of person. By person I mean an entity with two legs, two arms, a trunk, and, normally, a thinking head, a member of the homo sapiens species. Given the stage of evolutionary progress of these entities, they should have no problem understanding the paragraph I wrote above. [Bastian, take it easy, it is just a joke :-)] Since in most (every?) country, a corporation or business entity is considered a legal person, he may very well have been referring to something like that. -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sanchez http://familiasanchez.net/~roberto pgp99WEFVZfo7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
* Bastian Blank [Thu, 24 Nov 2005 23:45:02 +0100]: On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:48:39PM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: Yes, I have been doing things wrongly in the past, but this is not the case anymore. The Changed-By fields are correct now. See, for instance, my last upload: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/11/msg01728.html [upload of octave2.9_2.9.4-7] | Maintainer: Debian/IA64 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] So a big fuss is made about this practice making buildd uploads have an incorrect Changed-By header, when such uploads contain blatant incorrect maintainer information themselves (yes, I know why). What would you think of a person filing serious bugs because of this? Anyway, I'll answer more productively in the new thread. -- Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org Listening to: Mecano - Maquillaje -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
* Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 23:45]: On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:48:39PM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: Yes, I have been doing things wrongly in the past, but this is not the case anymore. The Changed-By fields are correct now. See, for instance, my last upload: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/11/msg01728.html [upload of octave2.9_2.9.4-7] | Maintainer: Debian/IA64 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Could you please explain to me why having Changed-By as a mailing list in this case (a binary NMU done by an autobuilder) is problematic? You may have good reasons for thinking Change-By should list a real person , but I fail to understand it. Notice that I am not religious about this ML versus person issue in the debian/changelog entry. If the majority of developers think we should do one way or the other, I will comply with the decision and do the necessary changes at the DOG (the Debian Octave Group, in case you did not yet get the acronym). I would like just to understand the rationale, though. -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:36:41PM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote: I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. Policy violations are RC by definition. Actually, no; policy violations are RC by *default*, but the definition of what's release-critical for a release is set by the release team with input from the developer community. I'm fairly certain that we're shipping packages in sarge that have maintainer fields pointing at people who have orphaned the packages in question; if it wasn't true at the time of the sarge release, it will certainly be true of sarge by the time etch releases. If we can survive this, I don't think that putting a mailing list address in a changelog (wrong though I think it is) would be grounds for delaying the release or removing the package from the release (the definition of RC). -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Fri, Nov 25, 2005 at 09:01:24AM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: * Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 23:45]: | Maintainer: Debian/IA64 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Could you please explain to me why having Changed-By as a mailing list in this case (a binary NMU done by an autobuilder) is problematic? You may have good reasons for thinking Change-By should list a real person , but I fail to understand it. Please explain we the meaning of person. Bastian -- I object to intellect without discipline; I object to power without constructive purpose. -- Spock, The Squire of Gothos, stardate 2124.5
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
[Please, Cc: to me, I am not currently subscribed to debian-devel.] * Thiemo Seufer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 02:13]: Stephen Gran wrote: FWIW, Rafael, at first blush I have to say I agree with you. A maintainer address in Debian is just a way to get in touch with someone when something goes wrong with the package. If the mailing list is a good way to get in touch with people when those packages break, then it seems like a reasonable maintainer address. AFAIU the changelog entry is supposed to bear the name of the uploader, and thus can't be a mailing list. Policy 4.4 seems to support this: The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be the details of the person uploading this version. They are not necessarily those of the usual package maintainer. Bastian, what's the rationale for the filings you've been doing? Do you really think a mailing list address, (where any and all correspondence about the packages is presumably archived and possibly even publicly accessible), is somehow worse than mailing a single person (who hopefully archives their package mail, but maybe not, and can almost be guaranteed not to have publicly browseable archives)? What are you hoping to do here? It provides a convenient way to find the person who did the final touches before an upload. The uses you are arguing are covered by the Maintainer: field. I think that are two distinct concepts here. The first is the maintainer of the package, which should receive any e-mail messages related to the package. This name appears in the debian/changelog entry as well as in the Maintainer field. All correspondence must be directed to this entity (either a person or a mailing list). The second concept is the real, physical person who did a specific upload. This appears in the Changed-By field and is used to know who is responsible for that upload. If this person is in the Uploaders field of debian/control, then debian-installer will not consider the upload as an NMU. Furthermore, this information is in the changes file and also stored in the debian-devel-changes mailing list archive. -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: As regards the copy of this information into the Changed-By field of the changes file, we are already requiring that the developers of the DOG use the -e option of debuild (cf the DOG Guidelines, at And the autobuilders get this value from where? They use the common way by looking into the changelog. At any rate, it seems that using mailing lists in changelog entries is common practice, like: Less than 2% is not common. Bastian -- ... freedom ... is a worship word... It is our worship word too. -- Cloud William and Kirk, The Omega Glory, stardate unknown signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
* Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 10:21]: On Wed, Nov 23, 2005 at 06:36:53PM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: As regards the copy of this information into the Changed-By field of the changes file, we are already requiring that the developers of the DOG use the -e option of debuild (cf the DOG Guidelines, at And the autobuilders get this value from where? They use the common way by looking into the changelog. They get the correct entity, which is in the changelog (in the case of the Debian Octave Group, it is [EMAIL PROTECTED]). If something goes wrong with the autobuild, then this entity should be contacted, not the person who did the upload. Why would the autobuilders be unhappy with a mailing list as the maintainer entity? On the other hand, debian-installer needs to know who uploaded the package and this informaation is in the Changed-By field of the changes file, which will hopefully be correct for any future upload done by the DOG members. At any rate, it seems that using mailing lists in changelog entries is common practice, like: Less than 2% is not common. I do not know how you ot this figure, but anything greater than 0% should be fixed if we decide that this practice is really against the Policy (which I am claiming is not). -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 02:21:27PM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: * Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 10:21]: And the autobuilders get this value from where? They use the common way by looking into the changelog. They get the correct entity, which is in the changelog (in the case of the Debian Octave Group, it is [EMAIL PROTECTED]). If something goes wrong with the autobuild, then this entity should be contacted, not the person who did the upload. Why would the autobuilders be unhappy with a mailing list as the maintainer entity? Bla, bla. The maintainer, which is listed in the control file, is the responsible entity. The people who changed the package is completely unrelated. On the other hand, debian-installer needs to know who uploaded the package and this informaation is in the Changed-By field of the changes file, which will hopefully be correct for any future upload done by the DOG members. First, what is DOG, I never heard about it. Second, I'm a member of the debian-installer team. I never say uploads with such entries. Bastian -- You're too beautiful to ignore. Too much woman. -- Kirk to Yeoman Rand, The Enemy Within, stardate unknown signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Rafael Laboissiere wrote: [Please, Cc: to me, I am not currently subscribed to debian-devel.] * Thiemo Seufer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 02:13]: Stephen Gran wrote: FWIW, Rafael, at first blush I have to say I agree with you. A maintainer address in Debian is just a way to get in touch with someone when something goes wrong with the package. If the mailing list is a good way to get in touch with people when those packages break, then it seems like a reasonable maintainer address. AFAIU the changelog entry is supposed to bear the name of the uploader, and thus can't be a mailing list. Policy 4.4 seems to support this: The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be the details of the person uploading this version. They are not necessarily those of the usual package maintainer. [snip] I think that are two distinct concepts here. The first is the maintainer of the package, which should receive any e-mail messages related to the package. This name appears in the debian/changelog entry as well as in the Maintainer field. All correspondence must be directed to this entity (either a person or a mailing list). You apparently missed the quote above, which specifically talks about the person uploading. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Rafael Laboissiere wrote: [Please, Cc: to me, I am not currently subscribed to debian-devel.] * Thiemo Seufer [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 02:13]: Stephen Gran wrote: FWIW, Rafael, at first blush I have to say I agree with you. A maintainer address in Debian is just a way to get in touch with someone when something goes wrong with the package. If the mailing list is a good way to get in touch with people when those packages break, then it seems like a reasonable maintainer address. AFAIU the changelog entry is supposed to bear the name of the uploader, and thus can't be a mailing list. Policy 4.4 seems to support this: The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be the details of the person uploading this version. They are not necessarily those of the usual package maintainer. [snip] I think that are two distinct concepts here. The first is the maintainer of the package, which should receive any e-mail messages related to the package. This name appears in the debian/changelog entry as well as in the Maintainer field. All correspondence must be directed to this entity (either a person or a mailing list). You apparently missed the quote above, which specifically talks about the person uploading. And we are in danger of allowing policy to drive practice, rather than vice versa. The problem is, there are many packages currently being group maintained. These groups generally have some sort of group contact email address: grep-dctrl -n -s Maintainer '' /var/lib/apt/lists/*Sources | grep list | wc -l 843 I see exactly one false positive in that rather simple minded test, so the number of packages maintined in this way is rather high. So, the complaint was that this: Maintainer: s390 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Doesn't have a real person behind it. When I look at the original, though, I see: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] That looks fine. It seems to me policy is lagging behind actual practice here, and the right thing to do is add something to the effect that the maintainer field may also contain the contact information for the group maintaining a package if it is group maintianed, so long as the Changed-By: field in the original upload still contains the real name of the uploader. Just my 2p, -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Stephen Gran wrote: [snip] The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be the details of the person uploading this version. They are not necessarily those of the usual package maintainer. [snip] I think that are two distinct concepts here. The first is the maintainer of the package, which should receive any e-mail messages related to the package. This name appears in the debian/changelog entry as well as in the Maintainer field. All correspondence must be directed to this entity (either a person or a mailing list). You apparently missed the quote above, which specifically talks about the person uploading. And we are in danger of allowing policy to drive practice, rather than vice versa. This rule is in policy for a long time now. If you want to have it changed, please propose a policy change instead of simply violating policy. The problem is, there are many packages currently being group maintained. These groups generally have some sort of group contact email address: grep-dctrl -n -s Maintainer '' /var/lib/apt/lists/*Sources | grep list | wc -l 843 I see exactly one false positive in that rather simple minded test, so the number of packages maintined in this way is rather high. So, the complaint was that this: Maintainer: s390 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Doesn't have a real person behind it. When I look at the original, though, I see: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] That looks fine. It seems to me policy is lagging behind actual practice here, and the right thing to do is add something to the effect that the maintainer field may also contain the contact information for the group maintaining a package if it is group maintianed, so long as the Changed-By: field in the original upload still contains the real name of the uploader. How could the autobuilder find out what the original Changed-By: content was? That is, short of reverse-engineering it from the signed .dsc, which may still choose the wrong key uid. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Stephen Gran wrote: [snip] And we are in danger of allowing policy to drive practice, rather than vice versa. The problem is, there are many packages currently being group maintained. These groups generally have some sort of group contact email address: grep-dctrl -n -s Maintainer '' /var/lib/apt/lists/*Sources | grep list | wc -l 843 I see exactly one false positive in that rather simple minded test, so the number of packages maintined in this way is rather high. Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. What is the difference betwen this: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this: Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you can show me where one is wrong and the other is right, I'll keep quiet. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. What is the difference betwen this: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this: Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you can show me where one is wrong and the other is right, I'll keep quiet. None is wrong or right. Both are contents of a .changes file, unavailable for a (re-)build from source. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 08:26:17PM +, Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. What is the difference betwen this: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this: Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you can show me where one is wrong and the other is right, I'll keep quiet. Here: Maintainer: Debian/m68k build daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] versus Maintainer: Debian/m68k build daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .../ -/ ---/ .--./ / .--/ .-/ .../ -/ ../ -./ --./ / -.--/ ---/ ..-/ .-./ / -/ ../ --/ ./ / .--/ ../ -/ / / -../ ./ -.-./ ---/ -../ ../ -./ --./ / --/ -.--/ / .../ ../ --./ -./ .-/ -/ ..-/ .-./ ./ .-.-.-/ / --/ ---/ .-./ .../ ./ / ../ .../ / ---/ ..-/ -/ -../ .-/ -/ ./ -../ / -/ ./ -.-./ / -./ ---/ .-../ ---/ --./ -.--/ / .-/ -./ -.--/ .--/ .-/ -.--/ .-.-.-/ / ...-.-/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. What is the difference betwen this: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this: Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you can show me where one is wrong and the other is right, I'll keep quiet. None is wrong or right. Both are contents of a .changes file, unavailable for a (re-)build from source. But the .dsc is. This stuff is easily traceable, if we want to. I can see the benefit of having the same name in the Maintainer field and in the changelog for some. I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. We still have the original signatures on the dsc and changes to find out who uploaded it, if we're interested. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. What is the difference betwen this: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this: Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you can show me where one is wrong and the other is right, I'll keep quiet. None is wrong or right. Both are contents of a .changes file, unavailable for a (re-)build from source. But the .dsc is. Which has no Changed-By: field. This stuff is easily traceable, if we want to. I can see the benefit of having the same name in the Maintainer field and in the changelog for some. A better one than Because I want to? Note that the Maintainer field is changed by buildds, their uploads count as (binary) NMU. I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. Policy violations are RC by definition. We still have the original signatures on the dsc and changes to find out who uploaded it, if we're interested. Only by tracking down the .changes file of the original upload. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thursday, 24 November 2005 22:03, Stephen Gran wrote: But the .dsc is. This stuff is easily traceable, if we want to. I can see the benefit of having the same name in the Maintainer field and in the changelog for some. I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. We still have the original signatures on the dsc and changes to find out who uploaded it, if we're interested. My opinion is that the Changed-By: should reflect the people who has changed the package in the best possible way, and if that way is by putting a mailing list there I can't see any problem with it. BTW, I'm the person who recommended to Rafael that kind of changelog schema based on the practices of the Debian Qt/KDE team. Best regards -- Isaac Clerencia at Warp Networks, http://www.warp.es Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpLy21VGs10D.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thursday, 24 November 2005 22:36, Thiemo Seufer wrote: I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. Policy violations are RC by definition. According to policy should's are not RC. -- Isaac Clerencia at Warp Networks, http://www.warp.es Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Debian: [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp6hoJRkM4bv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Isaac Clerencia wrote: On Thursday, 24 November 2005 22:03, Stephen Gran wrote: But the .dsc is. This stuff is easily traceable, if we want to. I can see the benefit of having the same name in the Maintainer field and in the changelog for some. I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. We still have the original signatures on the dsc and changes to find out who uploaded it, if we're interested. My opinion is that the Changed-By: should reflect the people who has changed the package in the best possible way, and if that way is by putting a mailing list there I can't see any problem with it. This obviously isn't achieved when the Changed-By: differs between the initial upload and later (re-)builds. Also, the people who has changed the package from the archive's POV is the person who signed the upload. For the package's users the Changed-By: is rather irrelevant, they have Maintainer: encoded in the package (which stems from the control file, not from the changelog). BTW, I'm the person who recommended to Rafael that kind of changelog schema based on the practices of the Debian Qt/KDE team. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Hi First, what is DOG, I never heard about it. In the debian/changelog for octave2.9 (and all other packages maintained collectively by the Debian Octave Group, the DOG) Start of Thread: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/11/msg01378.html Second, I'm a member of the debian-installer team. I never say uploads with such entries. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/11/msg01337.html Regards Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
* Wouter Verhelst [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 21:42]: On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 08:26:17PM +, Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Btw, about this simple-minded test: 299 of those are maintained by the Debian Install System Team, and nobody there felt compelled to put [EMAIL PROTECTED] in the changelog for whatever reason. What is the difference betwen this: Maintainer: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Rafael Laboissiere [EMAIL PROTECTED] and this: Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you can show me where one is wrong and the other is right, I'll keep quiet. Here: Maintainer: Debian/m68k build daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] versus Maintainer: Debian/m68k build daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yes, I have been doing things wrongly in the past, but this is not the case anymore. The Changed-By fields are correct now. See, for instance, my last upload: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/11/msg01728.html -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Isaac Clerencia wrote: On Thursday, 24 November 2005 22:36, Thiemo Seufer wrote: I can see arguments against it, but none that make it an RC bug. Policy violations are RC by definition. According to policy should's are not RC. Policy 5.6.4 has no should. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
* Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-24 15:51]: First, what is DOG, I never heard about it. The Debian Octave Group (http://pkg-octave.alioth.debian.org) -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thursday 24 November 2005 22:54, Thomas Weber wrote: Second, I'm a member of the debian-installer team. I never say uploads with such entries. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/11/msg01337.html Wrong example. The changelog for that version is: base-installer (1.37) unstable; urgency=low * [actual entries removed] -- Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:02:56 -0500 This is the way _all_ our (d-i team) uploads are done. All our control files look like this (actual people listed as uploader depends on the package): Maintainer: Debian Install System Team debian-boot@lists.debian.org Uploaders: Joey Hess [EMAIL PROTECTED], Other Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED], ... The changelog is always signed by a real person (mostly someone listed as uploader), not by the list address. pgpo5N5E0gunr.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
This one time, at band camp, Thiemo Seufer said: Isaac Clerencia wrote: On Thursday, 24 November 2005 22:36, Thiemo Seufer wrote: Policy violations are RC by definition. According to policy should's are not RC. Policy 5.6.4 has no should. It also has no must or could or might. However, 4.4, which is the relevant section to the discussion, does use 'should'. -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
On Thu, Nov 24, 2005 at 10:48:39PM +0100, Rafael Laboissiere wrote: Yes, I have been doing things wrongly in the past, but this is not the case anymore. The Changed-By fields are correct now. See, for instance, my last upload: http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-changes/2005/11/msg01728.html [upload of octave2.9_2.9.4-7] | Maintainer: Debian/IA64 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bastian -- One does not thank logic. -- Sarek, Journey to Babel, stardate 3842.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
I am moving this discussion to debian-devel, since I am not sure we are really violating the Policy. Feel free to move it further to debian-policy, if you think it is appropriate. * Bastian Blank [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-23 13:18]: Package: octave2.9 Version: 2.9.4-6 Severity: serious octave2.9_2.9.4-6_s390.changes: Format: 1.7 Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:48:51 +0100 Source: octave2.9 Binary: octave2.9-headers octave2.9-info octave2.9-htmldoc octave2.9 octave2.9-emacsen octave2.9-doc Architecture: s390 Version: 2.9.4-6 Distribution: unstable Urgency: low Maintainer: s390 Build Daemon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Changed-By: Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] octave2.9 lists a mailing list as uploader in the changelog. The policy specifies: | 4.4 Debian changelog: debian/changelog [...] | The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be | the details of the person uploading this version. They are not | necessarily those of the usual package maintainer. The information here | will be copied to the Changed-By field in the .changes file (see | Changed-By, Section 5.6.4), and then later used to send an | acknowledgement when the upload has been installed. In the debian/changelog for octave2.9 (and all other packages maintained collectively by the Debian Octave Group, the DOG), we do add details about who made the changes, like this: octave2.9 (2.9.3-1) experimental; urgency=low +++ Changes by Colin Ingram * New upstream release [...] +++ Changes by Rafael Laboissiere * The patches applied by dpatch are now done selectively according to the version of Octave. For that, the debian/patches/00list file is now generated when running ./debian/rules maintainer-scripts from the files debian/in/$(PACKAGE)-00list. [...] -- Debian Octave Group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri, 4 Nov 2005 10:30:54 +0100 I think this should be enough. As regards the copy of this information into the Changed-By field of the changes file, we are already requiring that the developers of the DOG use the -e option of debuild (cf the DOG Guidelines, at http://pkg-octave.alioth.debian.org/DOG-Guidelines.html#building-and-uploading-packages). and | 5.6.4 Changed-By |=20 | The name and email address of the person who changed the said package. | Usually the name of the maintainer. All the rules for the Maintainer | field apply here, too. A mailing list is no person which can do uploads. This is why there is the Changed-By filed in the changes file. At any rate, it seems that using mailing lists in changelog entries is common practice, like: http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/k/kdebase/kdebase_3.4.2-4/changelog I am not claiming that since others have mailing lists in changelog entries we have also the right to do it. I only want to know how we should address the issue. -- Rafael -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
This one time, at band camp, Rafael Laboissiere said: I am moving this discussion to debian-devel, since I am not sure we are really violating the Policy. Feel free to move it further to debian-policy, if you think it is appropriate. FWIW, Rafael, at first blush I have to say I agree with you. A maintainer address in Debian is just a way to get in touch with someone when something goes wrong with the package. If the mailing list is a good way to get in touch with people when those packages break, then it seems like a reasonable maintainer address. Bastian, what's the rationale for the filings you've been doing? Do you really think a mailing list address, (where any and all correspondence about the packages is presumably archived and possibly even publicly accessible), is somehow worse than mailing a single person (who hopefully archives their package mail, but maybe not, and can almost be guaranteed not to have publicly browseable archives)? What are you hoping to do here? -- - | ,''`.Stephen Gran | | : :' :[EMAIL PROTECTED] | | `. `'Debian user, admin, and developer | |`- http://www.debian.org | - signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#340428: octave2.9 - lists mailing list as uploader in changelog
Stephen Gran wrote: This one time, at band camp, Rafael Laboissiere said: I am moving this discussion to debian-devel, since I am not sure we are really violating the Policy. Feel free to move it further to debian-policy, if you think it is appropriate. FWIW, Rafael, at first blush I have to say I agree with you. A maintainer address in Debian is just a way to get in touch with someone when something goes wrong with the package. If the mailing list is a good way to get in touch with people when those packages break, then it seems like a reasonable maintainer address. AFAIU the changelog entry is supposed to bear the name of the uploader, and thus can't be a mailing list. Policy 4.4 seems to support this: The maintainer name and email address used in the changelog should be the details of the person uploading this version. They are not necessarily those of the usual package maintainer. Bastian, what's the rationale for the filings you've been doing? Do you really think a mailing list address, (where any and all correspondence about the packages is presumably archived and possibly even publicly accessible), is somehow worse than mailing a single person (who hopefully archives their package mail, but maybe not, and can almost be guaranteed not to have publicly browseable archives)? What are you hoping to do here? It provides a convenient way to find the person who did the final touches before an upload. The uses you are arguing are covered by the Maintainer: field. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
