-=| Salvatore Bonaccorso, Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:14:58AM +0200 |=- > I meant, that in final changelog > (In my opinion) the entries should be reorganized into 'groups', e.g. > > * debian/control: > - change 1 > - chagne 3 > * debian/rules: > - change 2 > ... > > instead of > > * debian/control: change 1 > * debian/rules: change 2 > * debian/control: change 3 True, the former looks better. I'd also consider removing the file heading, as irrelevant. For example a single change could affect more than one file (e.g. adopting tiny dh-style debian/rules, which also affects control and compat), or the file affected can be obvious (e.g. "Add dependency on foo-bar"). Personal tastes all around :) > But this is my opinion. And as you said, this can be adjusted later > before uploading the package. > > We should simply agree in the group how we want to manage > debian/changelog overall. I'm too fine to use git-dch only. Important > thing is to be consistent in the group to not loose any changes which > belong to debian/changelog. It seems difficult to do right now. As far as I see, there are people who find it OK to keep changelog commits separate (and use another method for updating changelog, be it git-dch or something else), and others who are used to the 'dch -a; debcommit' sequence (which still works with Git btw, but one may find the -a debcommit option useful). Changing the VCS alone is a big change, so we may want to postpone any other "policy" decisions for when the dust have settled :)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature