On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:47 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I don't create the tarballs. *Perhaps we could ask Johannes to
>> do something in his scripts that create them? *Beyond that I don't
>> see much point in checking-in a ChangeLog.

I can add that too.

> It definitely shouldn't be checked into git, but rather generated from
> the git commit logs; with git2cl, git log or similar. With an autotools
> based build system you would add a command to the Makefile.am so that
> automake runs git2cl during 'make dist' / 'make distcheck'. For
> non-autotools based projects you usually won't have a standard 'make
> dist' so it would need to be added to whatever script is the equivalent.
>
>> Do you like that git2cl output? *It seems rather ugly to me...
>
> Its the standard ancient GNU form for a ChangeLog. I have no opinion on
> its aesthetics and I don't think it matters what format it has really.

I think the format is indeed pretty ugly, can't we just do:

git log v0.9.8..v0.9.9 > ChangeLog

I've attached an example output of this on the iw package for example.
Paul, does Debian packaging not care the format the ChangeLog is on?

Luis
commit f8396b2454ece21a9db91ad592192b865522aa33
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sat Jan 24 15:36:08 2009 +0100

bump version to 0.9.9

commit c1d44a6c68790adc45d4a047cdd3a93332210c17
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sat Jan 24 15:35:30 2009 +0100

RTFM link for ap/master modes

commit 0c099f3edd23586680e700dbe16a484b0d0568f9
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sat Jan 24 15:15:46 2009 +0100

add commas to see also section

commit 585e62cbc9fddaba274d948dd0e1ab78b18fc02f
Author: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com>
Date: Fri Jan 23 15:02:38 2009 -0800

iw: fix typo, add few references

This fixes a small typo s/ip/iw, and adds references
to the other new wireless subsystem userspace applications/files.
Lets also point users to the iw wiki as it has lots of good stuff.

Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com>

commit 45d543f0a65cd4a5ad461b88acee1749a5c78431
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed Jan 21 16:30:52 2009 +0100

include netlink/netlink.h

also fixes the nl_handle vs. nl_sock issue that has been plaguing
people trying to use libnl from git

commit ee9cd9875412bbe0ab24c4f8acd25253ec1410c4
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sun Jan 18 18:13:54 2009 +0100

suppress flags on disabled channels

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:47 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I don't create the tarballs. *Perhaps we could ask Johannes to
>> do something in his scripts that create them? *Beyond that I don't
>> see much point in checking-in a ChangeLog.

I can add that too.

> It definitely shouldn't be checked into git, but rather generated from
> the git commit logs; with git2cl, git log or similar. With an autotools
> based build system you would add a command to the Makefile.am so that
> automake runs git2cl during 'make dist' / 'make distcheck'. For
> non-autotools based projects you usually won't have a standard 'make
> dist' so it would need to be added to whatever script is the equivalent.
>
>> Do you like that git2cl output? *It seems rather ugly to me...
>
> Its the standard ancient GNU form for a ChangeLog. I have no opinion on
> its aesthetics and I don't think it matters what format it has really.

I think the format is indeed pretty ugly, can't we just do:

git log v0.9.8..v0.9.9 > ChangeLog

I've attached an example output of this on the iw package for example.
Paul, does Debian packaging not care the format the ChangeLog is on?

Luis
commit f8396b2454ece21a9db91ad592192b865522aa33
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sat Jan 24 15:36:08 2009 +0100

bump version to 0.9.9

commit c1d44a6c68790adc45d4a047cdd3a93332210c17
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sat Jan 24 15:35:30 2009 +0100

RTFM link for ap/master modes

commit 0c099f3edd23586680e700dbe16a484b0d0568f9
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sat Jan 24 15:15:46 2009 +0100

add commas to see also section

commit 585e62cbc9fddaba274d948dd0e1ab78b18fc02f
Author: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com>
Date: Fri Jan 23 15:02:38 2009 -0800

iw: fix typo, add few references

This fixes a small typo s/ip/iw, and adds references
to the other new wireless subsystem userspace applications/files.
Lets also point users to the iw wiki as it has lots of good stuff.

Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@atheros.com>

commit 45d543f0a65cd4a5ad461b88acee1749a5c78431
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed Jan 21 16:30:52 2009 +0100

include netlink/netlink.h

also fixes the nl_handle vs. nl_sock issue that has been plaguing
people trying to use libnl from git

commit ee9cd9875412bbe0ab24c4f8acd25253ec1410c4
Author: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Sun Jan 18 18:13:54 2009 +0100

suppress flags on disabled channels

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kel Modderman <kel@otaku42.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 March 2010 04:13:25 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:47 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
>> >
>> >> FWIW, I don't create the tarballs. *Perhaps we could ask Johannes to
>> >> do something in his scripts that create them? *Beyond that I don't
>> >> see much point in checking-in a ChangeLog.
>>
>> I can add that too.
>>
>> > It definitely shouldn't be checked into git, but rather generated from
>> > the git commit logs; with git2cl, git log or similar. With an autotools
>> > based build system you would add a command to the Makefile.am so that
>> > automake runs git2cl during 'make dist' / 'make distcheck'. For
>> > non-autotools based projects you usually won't have a standard 'make
>> > dist' so it would need to be added to whatever script is the equivalent.
>> >
>> >> Do you like that git2cl output? *It seems rather ugly to me...
>> >
>> > Its the standard ancient GNU form for a ChangeLog. I have no opinion on
>> > its aesthetics and I don't think it matters what format it has really.
>>
>> I think the format is indeed pretty ugly, can't we just do:
>>
>> git log v0.9.8..v0.9.9 > ChangeLog
>>
>> I've attached an example output of this on the iw package for example.
>> Paul, does Debian packaging not care the format the ChangeLog is on?
>
> FWIW, I do not think all of this is necessary, the information stored in the
> git repository is rich and readily available. We're getting pedantic here.

Can you guys upstream a package into Debian with a gitweb URL reference?

Luis


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 43e72e891003011356l7491007co1e6837e2a64d8e43@mail. gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/43e72e891003011356l7491007co1e6837e2a64d8e43@mail. gmail.com

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Kel Modderman <kel@otaku42.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 March 2010 04:13:25 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 10:47 -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
>> >
>> >> FWIW, I don't create the tarballs. *Perhaps we could ask Johannes to
>> >> do something in his scripts that create them? *Beyond that I don't
>> >> see much point in checking-in a ChangeLog.
>>
>> I can add that too.
>>
>> > It definitely shouldn't be checked into git, but rather generated from
>> > the git commit logs; with git2cl, git log or similar. With an autotools
>> > based build system you would add a command to the Makefile.am so that
>> > automake runs git2cl during 'make dist' / 'make distcheck'. For
>> > non-autotools based projects you usually won't have a standard 'make
>> > dist' so it would need to be added to whatever script is the equivalent.
>> >
>> >> Do you like that git2cl output? *It seems rather ugly to me...
>> >
>> > Its the standard ancient GNU form for a ChangeLog. I have no opinion on
>> > its aesthetics and I don't think it matters what format it has really.
>>
>> I think the format is indeed pretty ugly, can't we just do:
>>
>> git log v0.9.8..v0.9.9 > ChangeLog
>>
>> I've attached an example output of this on the iw package for example.
>> Paul, does Debian packaging not care the format the ChangeLog is on?
>
> FWIW, I do not think all of this is necessary, the information stored in the
> git repository is rich and readily available. We're getting pedantic here.

Can you guys upstream a package into Debian with a gitweb URL reference?

Luis


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 43e72e891003011356l7491007co1e6837e2a64d8e43@mail. gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/43e72e891003011356l7491007co1e6837e2a64d8e43@mail. gmail.com

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 04:44 +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
>> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> > Can you guys upstream a package into Debian with a gitweb URL reference?
>> If I'm understanding the question correctly, yes. We have Vcs-$VCS (i.e.
>> Vcs-Git) and Vcs-Browser pseudo-headers. Both are optional.
>
> The Vcs-* fields are for the Debian package VCS.
>
> There is an emerging project to add upstream metadata to Debian source
> packages:
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata
>
>> I agree with Kel here, git2cl et al are unimportant details.
>
> Indeed, that is why the relevant lintian warning is marked pedantic.
> Personally I think this part of Debian policy needs a review, I don't
> have the time or energy to bring it up on debian-policy though.
>
>> Kel, mail me in private when you have something ready for review &
>> upload, as usual.
>
> Check this thread:
>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wpa-devel/2010-March/thread.html#2541
>
> He already created almost perfect packages that are pretty-much ready to
> be uploaded, just a couple of minor issues.

BTW -- while we're on the topic of 2.6.32 and the next Debian release,
and 802.11, do you guys ship iw by default yet? If not I highly
encourage it. It should be shipped just as iwconfig is shipped. iw is
the replacement for iwconfig, it uses the new nl80211 and nl80211 is
used by all cfg80211 and mac80211 drivers. All new upstream drivers
have to be cfg80211 based (or mac80211) so hence why I recommend to
just ship iw by default today.

Luis


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 43e72e891003031416m5572e171j8c7978b77b2780e3@mail. gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/43e72e891003031416m5572e171j8c7978b77b2780e3@mail. gmail.com

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Paul Wise <pabs@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 04:44 +0200, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
>> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> > Can you guys upstream a package into Debian with a gitweb URL reference?
>> If I'm understanding the question correctly, yes. We have Vcs-$VCS (i.e.
>> Vcs-Git) and Vcs-Browser pseudo-headers. Both are optional.
>
> The Vcs-* fields are for the Debian package VCS.
>
> There is an emerging project to add upstream metadata to Debian source
> packages:
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/UpstreamMetadata
>
>> I agree with Kel here, git2cl et al are unimportant details.
>
> Indeed, that is why the relevant lintian warning is marked pedantic.
> Personally I think this part of Debian policy needs a review, I don't
> have the time or energy to bring it up on debian-policy though.
>
>> Kel, mail me in private when you have something ready for review &
>> upload, as usual.
>
> Check this thread:
>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-wpa-devel/2010-March/thread.html#2541
>
> He already created almost perfect packages that are pretty-much ready to
> be uploaded, just a couple of minor issues.

BTW -- while we're on the topic of 2.6.32 and the next Debian release,
and 802.11, do you guys ship iw by default yet? If not I highly
encourage it. It should be shipped just as iwconfig is shipped. iw is
the replacement for iwconfig, it uses the new nl80211 and nl80211 is
used by all cfg80211 and mac80211 drivers. All new upstream drivers
have to be cfg80211 based (or mac80211) so hence why I recommend to
just ship iw by default today.

Luis


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 43e72e891003031416m5572e171j8c7978b77b2780e3@mail. gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/43e72e891003031416m5572e171j8c7978b77b2780e3@mail. gmail.com

On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Peter Samuelson <peter@p12n.org> wrote:
>
> [Luis R. Rodriguez]
>> BTW -- while we're on the topic of 2.6.32 and the next Debian
>> release, and 802.11, do you guys ship iw by default yet?
>
> It's available (version 0.9.14), but not shipped by default.

Can it?

Luis


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 43e72e891003031751uf0965a0o427708d86976a777@mail.g mail.com">http://lists.debian.org/43e72e891003031751uf0965a0o427708d86976a777@mail.g mail.com

On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 17:51 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Peter Samuelson <peter@p12n.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > [Luis R. Rodriguez]
>> >> BTW -- while we're on the topic of 2.6.32 and the next Debian
>> >> release, and 802.11, do you guys ship iw by default yet?
>> >
>> > It's available (version 0.9.14), but not shipped by default.
>>
>> Can it?
>
> Depends on what you mean by 'default'.

Wherever iwconfig ships, so should iw, not sure where iwconfig ships
by default on Debian.

> I think there's a good case for
> including it in the 'laptop' task, but not in the standard system
> (desktops and servers generally don't need it). *It should also be
> upgraded to 'optional' priority.

I see thanks, that makes sense, is that also the case for wireless-tools?

Luis


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 43e72e891003040001s1f0cb88m3fbd5243dbc4e185@mail.g mail.com">http://lists.debian.org/43e72e891003040001s1f0cb88m3fbd5243dbc4e185@mail.g mail.com