Your script

[Rafael Ostertag]

Hi Dago

On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 06:36:15PM +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote:
> Hi Rafi,
> 
> Am 22.04.2014 um 15:19 schrieb Rafael Ostertag <raos at opencsw.org>:
> >>>> 
> >>>> I also had this idea that instead of using VERSION in the Makefile, we
> >>>> could take the latest version from changelog:
> >>>> 
> >>>> VERSION = $(call extract_version_from_changelog)
> >>> 
> >>> +1
> >>> 
> >>> [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-source.html#s-dpkgchangelog
> >> 
> >> I don't think that is a good idea for two reasons:
> >> 
> >> 1. The application version (e.g. 1.2) is tightly coupled to DISTFILE and
> >>   updated only on version bumps.
> >> 2. The REV is calculated from the date which is good IMHO
> >> 
> >> The Changelog should IMHO contain high-level descriptions of changes, like
> >> "Switch from OpenSSL to GnuTLS" accommodated by a date when the change was
> >> done.
> > 
> > I don't see a contradiction. Let's see how a changelog might look like. Upon
> > initial CSW package creation it might look like this:
> > 
> > foo (0.2,REV=2014.01.01)
> > 
> >   * Initial packaging for OpenCSW.
> > 
> >  -- Rafael Ostertag  ?
> 
> I was more thinking of
> 
> foo (2004-06-14T23:34:30)
> 
>   * Initial packaging
> 
>  -- Rafael Ostertag ...
> 
> > From my POV, those were all high level descriptions. And they give the user a
> > clue what has changed. Low level stuff will be in svn or the recipe itself.
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, or maybe I don't get the point of the changelog.CSW.
> 
> My point was that not version/REV should be in the timemark, but just a real, precise
> time, like ISO8601

I see.

> 
> >> This may not be related to package rebuilds.
> > Can you elaborate on this? What type of change in the build recipe does not
> > require a respin? There is none on top of my head ;)
> 
> Because it is progress. The Changelog is for me some documentation of continuous
> work which documents larger chunks than a commit but less then a release of the
> package.

Aha! Apparently we use the changelog.CSW differently. I use it more the way as
outlined throughout [1]. I guess we should reach a consensus about this OR I
make cswch support both styles. Maintainers could then decide which style they
want to use and, if they use the debian style, they might even use Maciej's

 VERSION = $(call extract_version_from_changelog)

> 
> >> What may be a good idea is to retrieve the REV timestamp from the change
> >> log,
> >> but again rebuilding may result in binary-different packages with the same
> >> revstamp.
> > Yes, but is that really of any concern to the changelog? This happens with or
> > without changelog.
> 
> Having the same format in the changelog is IMHO confusing as it suggests that
> a package with the version and REV actually exists/existed.

Indeed, but the way I use it, this is the case...

cheers
rafi

[1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/