[05:17] Hi, I created a new account but I can't connect to https://launchpad.net/ , I get this following error: [05:17] (Error ID: OOPS-e94c93b3597d3d177d7ab5240dd28c50) [05:17] https://oops.canonical.com/?oopsid=OOPS-e94c93b3597d3d177d7ab5240dd28c50 === tomwardill changed the topic of #launchpad to: Help contact: tomwardill (09:00-18:00 UTC Mon-Fri) | Launchpad is an open source project: https://dev.launchpad.net/ | This channel is logged: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/ | User Guide: https://help.launchpad.net/ | Support and spam reporting: https://answers.launchpad.net/launchpad [10:22] I've fixed david_david's account, above, though they're not here. I guess it'll be a nice surprise for them. [17:17] I just realised that the Dgit control file header is specified by Debian Policy to be in the dsc file, not in the changes file. [17:17] Where is appropriate for rich history supply to git-ubuntu? [17:17] My branch uses the changes file. Is that wrong? [17:41] Uh. I think the test is whether the relevant control field would be the same for that source package regardless of what the target archive is [17:42] Since the same .dsc might be copied around between different archives, but the .changes is an instruction to upload it to a particular place [17:42] (Well, aside from the fact that .changes doesn't actually name the target archive because it was designed before people were thinking in those terms. But in principle ...) [17:46] One thing I haven't covered in my changes fields fields is _intent_. What does it mean if the uploader points to a git commit? [17:47] They might want it incorporated into git-ubuntu, or want something else done with it, or just one of the above. [17:47] I'm not sure there's a single correct commit associated with an upload or source package either, since there are lots of parallel git repositories that are sort of relevant now (salsa, dgit, git-ubuntu, an Ubuntu package maintainer's own packaging source VCS, etc) [17:48] This thought sort of ties in with your point I think [17:49] Because if I specify a git-ubuntu rich history git commit in a dsc file, it's not necessarily _the_ source package's git commit. [17:49] Perhaps it's more of an instruction, in which case the changes file might be more appropriate. [17:49] (an instruction being associated more with the upload than with the source package itself) [17:50] Maybe I should also add an intent field, so the user can confirm that they want the commit integrated into git-ubuntu. Or maybe that's overengineering it. [17:50] Or, I could make the field names git-ubuntu specific. [17:50] (right now I'm using Vcs-Git, Vcs-Git-Commit and Vcs-Git-Refs) === gurmble is now known as grumble