Re: Use of "UNRELEASED" in debian/changelog

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 01:01:13PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> I asked Andreas if it was acceptable to join this team
> just to work on minor QA issues, and he said yes,
> so here I am :-)

Welcome!

> My question: Would it be acceptable to do this instead?
> 
> - One commit fixing the bug and doing nothing else.
> 
> - One commit which updates debian/changelog for the
> new upload.

I actually do this and IMHO that's fine. I populate d/ch via
commit messages (with gbp dch).

> (B) Yes, but only if you don't keep the package in a half-fixed state,
> i.e. only if you do all that at nearly the same time, including the tag
> and the new upload, so that we don't have changes in master
> without their debian/changelog entries.

If I am not uploading the package even after fixing the bug in salsa,
I add changelog and leave it as UNRELEASED and also write some reasoning
as TODO for not doing so. I think Andreas does something similar.
Thus far, it has worked out well.

> To fix this in stable, I would create a branch called "bookworm"
> from the master commit matching the stable version and put
> the appropriate changes there.
> 
> Just to be sure: The name of the branch would be "bookworm",
> not "master/bookworm" or anything like that, right?

I do exactly this (no master/bookworm). Maybe you could consider using
debian/bookworm but just bookworm is also OK. I've used the latter in
the past, without issues.

Best,
Nilesh

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQSglbZu4JAkvuai8HIqJ5BL1yQ+2gUCZTJi1QAKCRAqJ5BL1yQ+
2hiSAQDZqFkTM4A245vvm/5T5JvTvH55dnk+12N5xPESPoLXdgD/RCDX/ilE8OqB
AjZMUY4P9F2xlb/YcbKHmmY94jPgrAc=
=Osnt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----