Stefan Potyra sistpoty at
Wed Nov 7 23:16:31 GMT 2007


Am Mittwoch 07 November 2007 21:22:56 schrieb Scott James Remnant:
> > >
> > > I suggest we use a common debian/README.ubuntu-dev file to do this.
> >
> > Isn't debian/changelog the place where this should get documented?
> Not for everything -- e.g. the steps to regenerate the readahead lists
> isn't suitable for putting in a changelog entry; it's general
> documentation that should be attached to the package.

I guess that README.Debian would be the right place for such instructions? 
(For clarity this can then be referred to from changelog, like "refresh foo 
with bar, see README.Debian").

Actually the only thing when merging that I didn't handle via standard files 
was to put patches, that I had applied straight to the source package into 
debian/ubuntu-patches for reference together with a small README.patches.

Anyways, I very much second that we need to document better what was done to a 
package for reasons you mentioned already (which I learnt the hard way when 
having to redo my initial merges *g*).

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : 

More information about the ubuntu-devel mailing list