Hi The 'gnulib' source package has built and shipped the binary package 'git-merge-changelog' but now upstream split this off into a proper package and there is a release of it:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2025-12/msg00009.html I filed the ITP below to package it and Salsa builds it fine: https://salsa.debian.org/debian/git-merge-changelog/-/pipelines However, how to handle this situation where a NEW package takes over the name of an existing package? Is that a good idea? Should we make an upload of 'gnulib' that drops the binary package, let that migrate to testing, and then upload git-merge-changelog to NEW? Will that cause any problems wrt package naming in the future? Thoughts? If the source name of git-merge-changelog below causes confusion, maybe we could use upstream's other name 'vc-changelog' however as far as I understand, 'vc-changelog' is an umbrella project that currently is only hosting the 'git-merge-changelog' sub-project, so this is not ideal. We could also use completely different package names for the new package, like 'git-changelog-merge' but I'm not sure this really solves anything: they would need to Conflicts: until the old gnulib package disappears, and then the naming would just be confusing. /Simon Boyuan Yang <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, 31 Dec 2025 22:37:04 +0100 Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Package: wnpp >> Severity: wishlist >> Owner: Simon Josefsson <[email protected]> >> * Package name : git-merge-changelog >> Version : 1.0 >> Upstream Author : Bruno Haible >> * URL : https://www.gnu.org/software/vc-changelog/ >> * License : GPLv3+ >> Programming Lang: C >> Description : git merge driver for GNU ChangeLog files >> ChangeLog files *always* foul up most version control systems in >> their default configuration. >> . >> git-merge-changelog is a tool from gnulib designed to help with this >> for the case of GNU-style ChangeLogs; it can be used with at least >> git, bzr, and hg. >> Currently the Debian 'gnulib' package provide this binary package, >> but I >> suggest to replace it with this one since it is now packaged and >> released properly outside of gnulib. >> https://salsa.debian.org/debian/git-merge-changelog > Please pay special attention to the *binary* package version. We may > have to add an epoch on initial packaging. (do we need to discuss it > on debian-devel?) > > Best, > Boyuan Yang >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
