Comment 25 for bug 2039873

Hi Aleksandr,

Let me try to clarify this for you. The two options presented by you are not what we want. We want to grab the package from Debian unstable (with the latest changes) and merge what we have in Ubuntu, which means having a complete changelog (including the previous Ubuntu changes). You can find some info about the merge process here:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Merging

There is some outdated content there (like using bzr), if you want to do this using git properly you can try to use the workflow described here:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/Merging/GitWorkflow

This is also some good content maintained by the Canonical Server team which explains well the package merge process in our team's perspective:

https://github.com/canonical/ubuntu-maintainers-handbook/blob/main/PackageMerging.md

I hope that's useful.

Now, I took a quick look at the proposed changes and I believe you should double check the necessity of those binary packages name changes. We are providing some transitional packages since Jammy, maybe now it is time to get rid off them. In Debian, those transitional packages do not exist, a good a idea (since we are merging our changes with Debian again) might be to follow the package names from Debian. If it makes sense, this will make the package way simpler. As a data point, the Ubuntu package provides 12 binary packages and the Debian one provides 6 binary packages.

In the debian/tests/control file you need to add a comma (',') between the two restriction names. A comment here is that if you merge the changes from Debian we will get 2 more DEP-8 tests (autopkgtest) in the package.

Nitpick: you committed the debian/files file which is not necessary.