Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-30 Thread Magnus Holmgren
On Tuesday 30 January 2007 08:52, Marcus Better wrote:
 Magnus Holmgren wrote:
  I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A
  brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one
  called ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the
  various source files.

 This is common with Java packages built with Maven, where a detailed commit
 log is automatically generated and included in the sources. In that case I
 prefer to leave out the commit log altogether since it's mainly useful for
 developers.

But what if Changes says see ChangeLog for details?

-- 
Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)

  Exim is better at being younger, whereas sendmail is better for 
   Scrabble (50 point bonus for clearing your rack) -- Dave Evans


pgpBvvfqxBxpa.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-30 Thread Marcus Better
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
 This is common with Java packages built with Maven, where a detailed
 commit log is automatically generated and included in the sources. In
 that case I prefer to leave out the commit log altogether

 But what if Changes says see ChangeLog for details?

Mention of the ChangeLog file does not imply that it is available in the
same directory. I would probably let it stand.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-30 Thread Daniel Leidert
Am Dienstag, den 30.01.2007, 00:35 -0500 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
 On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:44:00AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
  Am Dienstag, den 30.01.2007, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Magnus Holmgren:
   I better ask this once and for all...
   
   I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A 
   brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one 
   called 
   ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the various 
   source files. Which one should be installed as changelog?
   
   I'd guess the brief one, since it's the one users are most likely to want 
   to 
   read first, but on the other hand it looks a bit confusing with both a 
   changelog(.gz) and a ChangeLog.
  
  I agree to this. I normally prefer to install the NEWS file (release
  changelog) instead of the ChangeLog file (file changelog). It's shorter
  and easier to understand. File changelogs are often very detailed and
  important information is hard to find.
 I would prefer to have both available to me, with the detailed changelog as
 changelog.gz and the summary as NEWS.gz.  dh_installchangelogs handles this
 with ./debian/package.NEWS.

Dumb question: How this? debian/package.NEWS is (from man-page reading)
just a different form for debian/NEWS and this file is installed
as /usr/share/doc/package/NEWS.Debian.gz, which is not intended to
contain the upstream NEWS file. Am I wrong?

Regards, Daniel


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-30 Thread Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007, Daniel Leidert wrote:
 Dumb question: How this? debian/package.NEWS is (from man-page reading)
 just a different form for debian/NEWS and this file is installed
 as /usr/share/doc/package/NEWS.Debian.gz, which is not intended to
 contain the upstream NEWS file. Am I wrong?

You are correct.  And anyone using the NEWS.Debian file for upstream
changelog will get LARTed when someone notices the missuse.  NEWS.Debian is
supposed to be used only as a extremely high signal-to-noise ratio medium
for very important announcements about package/program behaviour changing,
and other very important information to package users.

If it doesn't need to be shown to every user of a package at upgrade, it
does not belong on NEWS.Debian.

-- 
  One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-30 Thread Magnus Holmgren
On Tuesday 30 January 2007 01:54, Magnus Holmgren wrote:
 I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A
 brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one
 called ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the
 various source files. Which one should be installed as changelog?

OK, so now I have three different bids: 1) Distribute the brief changelog 
as changelog.gz and the detailed one as is; 2) distribute the detailed 
changelog as changelog.gz and the brief one as is; 3) only distribute the 
brief changelog in the binary package. Any more opinions?

The package in question is libmail-dkim-perl, BTW.

-- 
Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)


pgp5Gh5uSyveP.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-29 Thread Magnus Holmgren
I better ask this once and for all...

I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A 
brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one called 
ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the various 
source files. Which one should be installed as changelog?

I'd guess the brief one, since it's the one users are most likely to want to 
read first, but on the other hand it looks a bit confusing with both a 
changelog(.gz) and a ChangeLog.

-- 
Magnus Holmgren[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   (No Cc of list mail needed, thanks)


pgpdBDek3enMc.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-29 Thread Margarita Manterola

On 1/29/07, Magnus Holmgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A
brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one called
ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the various
source files. Which one should be installed as changelog?

I'd guess the brief one, since it's the one users are most likely to want to
read first, but on the other hand it looks a bit confusing with both a
changelog(.gz) and a ChangeLog.


uhm, if upstream has a file called ChangeLog, I'd be inclined to
install that one as changelog.gz, and install the other one as
Changes.gz.

You could do other things, but I think that this one is the simplest
and clearest.

--
Besos,
Marga


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-29 Thread Daniel Leidert
Am Dienstag, den 30.01.2007, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Magnus Holmgren:
 I better ask this once and for all...
 
 I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A 
 brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one called 
 ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the various 
 source files. Which one should be installed as changelog?
 
 I'd guess the brief one, since it's the one users are most likely to want to 
 read first, but on the other hand it looks a bit confusing with both a 
 changelog(.gz) and a ChangeLog.

I agree to this. I normally prefer to install the NEWS file (release
changelog) instead of the ChangeLog file (file changelog). It's shorter
and easier to understand. File changelogs are often very detailed and
important information is hard to find.

Regards, Daniel


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-29 Thread Justin Pryzby
On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:44:00AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
 Am Dienstag, den 30.01.2007, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Magnus Holmgren:
  I better ask this once and for all...
  
  I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A 
  brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one 
  called 
  ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the various 
  source files. Which one should be installed as changelog?
  
  I'd guess the brief one, since it's the one users are most likely to want 
  to 
  read first, but on the other hand it looks a bit confusing with both a 
  changelog(.gz) and a ChangeLog.
 
 I agree to this. I normally prefer to install the NEWS file (release
 changelog) instead of the ChangeLog file (file changelog). It's shorter
 and easier to understand. File changelogs are often very detailed and
 important information is hard to find.
I would prefer to have both available to me, with the detailed changelog as
changelog.gz and the summary as NEWS.gz.  dh_installchangelogs handles this
with ./debian/package.NEWS.

Justin


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Re: Multiple upstream changelog files

2007-01-29 Thread Marcus Better
Magnus Holmgren wrote:
 I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A
 brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one
 called ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the
 various source files.

This is common with Java packages built with Maven, where a detailed commit
log is automatically generated and included in the sources. In that case I
prefer to leave out the commit log altogether since it's mainly useful for
developers.

Marcus



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]