Re: Bug#1029186: reply: RFS: libcommons-validator-java/1:1.7-1 [Team] -- ease and speed development and maintenance of validation rules
`UNRELEASED` is used because it will cause a failure if you accidentally try to upload it, which prevents accidental releases before they are intended. At the point of release, you should change it to be `unstable` or `experimental` or a backports repository. On Saturday, February 4, 2023 8:18:19 AM MST min sun wrote: > > Hello Min Sun, > > > > is there a particular reason why you opt for / stick to distribution > > `UNRELEASED` for a package already monitored by the tracker?[1] It is the > > entry e.g., `dch -i` puts into file `/debian/changelog` when you start to > > work on a new version (increment) of a package. After all other other > > work on your side is done, an eventual change to the string `unstable` > > (then lower case only) is one of the keys necessary to let results of > > your work enter branch `unstable`, and later `testing`, etc. > > Thanks for your clarification, Tony, > > I did not mean to specify it as `UNRELEASE`, the ‘uscan and uupdate” tools > insert this keyword to debian/changelog. > > I am not clear about the internal mechanism from `UNRELEASED` to `testing` > and later stage. > > I need learn more about Debian policy along with your guideline. > > All the best. -- Soren Stoutner so...@stoutner.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Bug#1029186: reply: RFS: libcommons-validator-java/1:1.7-1 [Team] -- ease and speed development and maintenance of validation rules
> Hello Min Sun, > > is there a particular reason why you opt for / stick to distribution > `UNRELEASED` for a package already monitored by the tracker?[1] It is the > entry e.g., `dch -i` puts into file `/debian/changelog` when you start to work > on a new version (increment) of a package. After all other other work on your > side is done, an eventual change to the string `unstable` (then lower case > only) is one of the keys necessary to let results of your work enter branch > `unstable`, and later `testing`, etc. Thanks for your clarification, Tony, I did not mean to specify it as `UNRELEASE`, the ‘uscan and uupdate” tools insert this keyword to debian/changelog. I am not clear about the internal mechanism from `UNRELEASED` to `testing` and later stage. I need learn more about Debian policy along with your guideline. All the best.
Bug#1029186: reply: RFS: libcommons-validator-java/1:1.7-1 [Team] -- ease and speed development and maintenance of validation rules
On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 07:55:08AM +, min sun wrote: > > Hi mentors! > > I packaged new version of libcommons-validator [1] and uploaded again to > debian mentors[2], please refer to Upload #2 . Hi! I will review and sponsor the upload soon. Thank you for your contribution to Debian! Cheers, tony
Re: Bug#1029186: reply: RFS: libcommons-validator-java/1:1.7-1 [Team] -- ease and speed development and maintenance of validation rules
Postscript: If you already edit `debian/changelog` (`UNRELEASED` -> `unstable`), the trailing spaces in this file equally can be removed in the same session, too.
Re: Bug#1029186: reply: RFS: libcommons-validator-java/1:1.7-1 [Team] -- ease and speed development and maintenance of validation rules
Hello Min Sun, is there a particular reason why you opt for / stick to distribution `UNRELEASED` for a package already monitored by the tracker?[1] It is the entry e.g., `dch -i` puts into file `/debian/changelog` when you start to work on a new version (increment) of a package. After all other other work on your side is done, an eventual change to the string `unstable` (then lower case only) is one of the keys necessary to let results of your work enter branch `unstable`, and later `testing`, etc. Regards, Norwid [1] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/libcommons-validator-java
Bug#1029186: reply: RFS: libcommons-validator-java/1:1.7-1 [Team] -- ease and speed development and maintenance of validation rules
Hi mentors! I packaged new version of libcommons-validator [1] and uploaded again to debian mentors[2], please refer to Upload #2 . The below line from debian/maven.properties was omitted to ensure all the tests get passed. maven.test.failure.ignore=true In fact all the test cases should get passed. But the DomainValidatorStartupTest depends on a package not available in Debian, which breaks the building. I plan to skip it during the testing but have no ways . And finally I decide to remove it entirely through adding a new patch. I’d appreciate for your further sponsorship. [1] https://archive.apache.org/dist/commons/validator/source/commons-validator-1.7-src.tar.gz [2] https://mentors.debian.net/package/libcommons-validator-java/
