Merge lp:~ampelbein/ubuntu/oneiric/libqtbamf/lp-765915 into lp:ubuntu/oneiric/libqtbamf
Status: | Merged |
---|---|
Merge reported by: | Didier Roche |
Merged at revision: | not available |
Proposed branch: | lp:~ampelbein/ubuntu/oneiric/libqtbamf/lp-765915 |
Merge into: | lp:ubuntu/oneiric/libqtbamf |
Diff against target: |
52 lines (+10/-3) 2 files modified
debian/changelog (+6/-0) debian/libqtbamf1.symbols (+4/-3) |
To merge this branch: | bzr merge lp:~ampelbein/ubuntu/oneiric/libqtbamf/lp-765915 |
Related bugs: |
Reviewer | Review Type | Date Requested | Status |
---|---|---|---|
Didier Roche | 2011-06-21 | Approve on 2011-06-22 | |
Sebastien Bacher | 2011-06-19 | Needs Fixing on 2011-06-21 | |
Review via email:
|
Andreas Moog (ampelbein) wrote : | # |
I removed the optional symbols because I consider it good practice to have a symbols file that actually matches the symbols of my library. I readded them now.
And at least in my pbuilder it is still an issue, the build fails due to wrong symbols file.
Also, libqtbamf1 was last built in natty (not oneiric), see https:/
Didier Roche (didrocks) wrote : | # |
Thanks for your work there! Merged :)
Please, in the future, ensure two things:
- check the output of debcheckout or apt-get source which should tell you that there is a Vcs-Bzr tag in debian/control pointing to the branch where the packaging is (I had to put your commit manually to lp:bamf-qt).
- when request a change, let the changelog use "UNRELEASED" instead of distribution, in case we are pending updates to add other changes. Then, the sponsor will change UNRELEASED to the version.
I've pushed your changed to lp:bamf-qt. Thanks a lot for your contribution there! :-)
Andreas Moog (ampelbein) wrote : | # |
On 06/22/2011 09:58 AM, Didier Roche wrote:
> Review: Approve
> Thanks for your work there! Merged :)
> Please, in the future, ensure two things:
> - check the output of debcheckout or apt-get source which should tell you that there is a Vcs-Bzr tag in debian/control pointing to the
branch where the packaging is (I had to put your commit manually to
lp:bamf-qt).
I use neither of those tools. I use the workflow suggested in
http://
Maybe lp should automatically let ubuntu:<package> point to the location
specified in the VCS controlfield?
But for the future I will make sure to look at that field first to
ensure I'm not working on a package that has a different workflow than
the suggested one to not make sponsors live harder, like in this case.
> - when request a change, let the changelog use "UNRELEASED" instead of distribution, in case we are pending updates to add other changes. Then, the sponsor will change UNRELEASED to the version.
Ok.
> I've pushed your changed to lp:bamf-qt.
Thank you!
Cheers, Andreas
Didier Roche (didrocks) wrote : | # |
Yeah, pointing directly to the right branch was what we discussed on ubuntu-devel mailing list some weeks ago. However, we have some debian/ only directory and it seems to not fit this case. Anyway I asked Daniel to mention that as you are not the only one to get hit by that, so there is clearly something wrong in our side :)
Thanks again for your work there :-)
Didier Roche (didrocks) wrote : | # |
FYI: https:/
Hope that can come to some fixes :)
Thanks, why do you delete optional symbols? they should not break the build, note that 0.2.1-0ubuntu1 built fine in oneiric, is that still an issue?