Hi,<br><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 5:52 AM, Lucas Nussbaum <<a href="mailto:lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net" target="_blank">lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net</a>> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Hi,<br><br>As you might have read in [1], I worked on exporting more info about<br>packages in Ubuntu to the Debian infrastructure, specifically the Debian<br> PTS[2] and the Debian Developer Packages Overview[3].<br><br>[1] <a href="http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/blog/?p=295" target="_blank">http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/blog/?p=295</a><br>[2] <a href="http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/dpkg.html" target="_blank">http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/dpkg.html</a><br> [3] <a href="http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=packages@qa.debian.org&ubuntu=1" target="_blank">http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=packages@qa.debian.org&ubuntu=1</a><br><br>However, I'd like to use that opportunity to discuss a few points:<br> <br>I know you are over-busy, etc., and that your #1 priority can't be to<br>push changes back to Debian.  But those changes should not replace<br>submitting bugs to the Debian BTS, like the patches on patches.u.c<br> should not replace submitting patches to the BTS. Most Debian Developers<br>will probably only rarely have a look at the bugs in LP. If I hear<br>Ubuntu Developers saying "but there was no need to report it to Debian,<br> you already should have known about it since there was a link on<br>PTS/DDPO!", I will strongly regret pushing that change.<br></blockquote> <div> </div> <div>This is true, it doesn't take a long time to report a Bug tu debian, and we can't be lazy and say "the patch is there, if the DD want's it, he/she can download it from there" since we want our changes in there for easier maintainment of our packages, DD's only care about their Bugs, not ours.</div> <div> </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><span></span><br>Secondly, you generally could improve a lot at documenting your changes.<br>If you put more effort on properly documenting what you change in your<br> packages, it would allow Debian developers to understand why you made a<br>specific change, and they would be a lot more likely to merge the change<br>in the Debian package (which means less work for you during the next<br> merge). If a DD can't figure out why you made a change, it's likely that<br>he won't ask you, and will just ignore the change.<br></blockquote> <div> </div> <div>Can you please give an example of that i don't think i'm fully understanding your point (not a real example, just whatever comes to your mind first)</div> <div> </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><span></span><br>It would be great if, in addition to listing the remaining changes in<br>the last changelog entry, you could also list for each change:<br> - the URL of the corresponding Ubuntu bug (if any)<br>- the URL of the corresponding upstream bug (if any)<br>- the URL of the corresponding Debian bug (if any)<br>- a summary of the changes (pointing to URLs explaining the context of<br>  the change, if possible/needed)<br>- whether the change is Ubuntu-specific, or should be merged upstream<br> or in Debian (with a rationale if it's Ubuntu-specific)<br></blockquote> <div> </div> <div>We already work like this, we use to use (LP: #XXXX) which means Launchpad Bug report #XXXX as DD's use (Closes: #XXXX), so there is no much more to do for LP Bugs (Ubuntu ones). For the upstream and debian bugs we link them on the LP Bug report, so if the DD is interested on following links he can from them, with this i'm not saying is the best to do and rejecting your suggestions, just noticing it if you didn't know it, maybe is not as good as it could and we can do it better, so if you have anything to add please do it.</div> <div> </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><span></span><br>There's a wiki page on<br><a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PatchTaggingGuidelines" target="_blank">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/PatchTaggingGuidelines</a> about<br> basically the same thing (it documents the changes in the patches, which<br>is not suitable if the changes are made directly in the source, without<br>using a patch system), but that policy doesn't seem to be in widespread<br> use, unfortunately.<br></blockquote> <div> </div> <div>I didn't knew about that page and i'm sure a lot of people doesn't know also, are you interested on helping me dive into wiki pages to write a complete document with all of them and then try to spread the word about it/them? Did someone want to help? </div> <div> </div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><span></span><br>Thank you,<br><font color="#888888">--<br>| Lucas Nussbaum<br>| <a href="mailto:lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net" target="_blank">lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net</a>   <a href="http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/" target="_blank">http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/</a> |<br> | jabber: <a href="mailto:lucas@nussbaum.fr" target="_blank">lucas@nussbaum.fr</a>             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |<br></font><br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)<br><br>iD8DBQFIV5dZ2hliNwI7P08RAmtUAJoC7JrcZ1xZwsQMOx5tKgYFYfndRQCdHhg2<br> ZI7NB+Hh5rbVCL+VoIrEtDI=<br>=Bft/<br>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br><br>--<br>Ubuntu-motu mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com" target="_blank">Ubuntu-motu@lists.ubuntu.com</a><br>Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu</a><br> <br></blockquote></div><br>