[opensuse-buildservice] Promote meaningful changelog entries!
Hi everyone, we really need to promote meaningful changelog entries! While looking at a package, that I wanted to push into Factory (Autobuild), I noticed a lot of changelog entries like this: - update to version x.y This isn't exactly meaningful :( Let alone, it won't be checked into Factory. Having to redo changelogs turns out to be very tedious! How we want to proceed with this? Best, Christoph -- Christoph Thiel, Tech. Project Management, Research & Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 02:08:48PM +0100, Christoph Thiel wrote:
Hi everyone,
we really need to promote meaningful changelog entries! While looking at a package, that I wanted to push into Factory (Autobuild), I noticed a lot of changelog entries like this:
- update to version x.y
This isn't exactly meaningful :( Let alone, it won't be checked into
Could you elaborate a bit why this is not meaningful if what the packager did is exactly updating the packaged tool/application to version x.y? Robert -- Robert Schiele Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:rschiele@gmail.com "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 11:49:59PM +0100, Robert Schiele wrote:
we really need to promote meaningful changelog entries! While looking at a package, that I wanted to push into Factory (Autobuild), I noticed a lot of changelog entries like this:
- update to version x.y
This isn't exactly meaningful :( Let alone, it won't be checked into
Could you elaborate a bit why this is not meaningful if what the packager did is exactly updating the packaged tool/application to version x.y?
From a packagers point of view it really boils down to "update to version x.y". But if you look at it from a user's point of view, it's much more convenient to not having to go to some URL to figure out what actually changed and why you should upgrade. This also holds true, especially, for our Autobuild folks, who review all submissions into Factory (and other distros). Prj. Managers appreciate those detailed changes, too!
I totally agree this takes some time and can be quite tedious sometimes.. ;) Best, Christoph -- Christoph Thiel, Tech. Project Management, Research & Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 12:07:55PM +0100, Christoph Thiel wrote:
From a packagers point of view it really boils down to "update to version x.y". But if you look at it from a user's point of view, it's much more convenient to not having to go to some URL to figure out what actually changed and why you should upgrade. This also holds true, especially, for our Autobuild folks, who review all submissions into Factory (and other distros). Prj. Managers appreciate those detailed changes, too!
I totally agree this takes some time and can be quite tedious sometimes.. ;)
For me this sounds like mixing up the layers. If I read "update to whatever" then it is not really a hard job to go to the URL (which is often in the package description as well) and look up the details about the software changes there if this is what I am interested in. If you mix in the changes to the software into the changes that the packager did to the package it becomes much more difficult to find what the _packager_ actually did to the package. In my opinion the package changelog is neither a good place to replace communication infrastructure to your manager nor it is a good place to do customer marketing. I still consider the changelog to be a log to track changes you did. Robert -- Robert Schiele Dipl.-Wirtsch.informatiker mailto:rschiele@gmail.com "Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur."
On 2007-02-19 12:26:04 +0100, Robert Schiele wrote:
On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 12:07:55PM +0100, Christoph Thiel wrote:
From a packagers point of view it really boils down to "update to version x.y". But if you look at it from a user's point of view, it's much more convenient to not having to go to some URL to figure out what actually changed and why you should upgrade. This also holds true, especially, for our Autobuild folks, who review all submissions into Factory (and other distros). Prj. Managers appreciate those detailed changes, too!
I totally agree this takes some time and can be quite tedious sometimes.. ;)
For me this sounds like mixing up the layers. If I read "update to whatever" then it is not really a hard job to go to the URL (which is often in the package description as well) and look up the details about the software changes there if this is what I am interested in.
If you mix in the changes to the software into the changes that the packager did to the package it becomes much more difficult to find what the _packager_ actually did to the package.
In my opinion the package changelog is neither a good place to replace communication infrastructure to your manager nor it is a good place to do customer marketing. I still consider the changelog to be a log to track changes you did.
right. but often users might care why you did the version upgrade. so it is nice to outline/summarize at least the most important changes. darix -- openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux openSUSE is good for you www.opensuse.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
Marcus Rueckert escribió:
right. but often users might care why you did the version upgrade. so it is nice to outline/summarize at least the most important changes.
does **users** actually read that ? probably only advanced users ;-) IMO, the rpm changelog is not the place to be verbose about changes in the packaged **software itself**, that's the reason why the NEWS , CHANGELOG and vendor websites exists. upstream authors already provide that information why on earth we should duplicate information ?
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 12:41:07 +0700, Cristian Rodriguez R.
Marcus Rueckert escribió:
IMO, the rpm changelog is not the place to be verbose about changes in the packaged **software itself**, that's the reason why the NEWS , CHANGELOG and vendor websites exists. upstream authors already provide that information why on earth we should duplicate information ?
agree. i always add ChangeLog file from the source (if available) to %doc line in every package i build. -- http://donnie.110mb.com PGP Fingerprint: D7BB F0E5 C0DD 534A 11A2 F310 0DDD 05F1 C3DC 26AB --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
On 2007-02-20 02:41:07 -0300, Cristian Rodriguez R. wrote:
Marcus Rueckert escribió:
right. but often users might care why you did the version upgrade. so it is nice to outline/summarize at least the most important changes.
does **users** actually read that ? probably only advanced users ;-)
IMO, the rpm changelog is not the place to be verbose about changes in the packaged **software itself**, that's the reason why the NEWS , CHANGELOG and vendor websites exists. upstream authors already provide that information why on earth we should duplicate information ?
because e.g. autobuild people read it. and depending on the freeze situation the information there gives us an hint if we can still include the package or not. cristian... check the changes entries from the php5 package in factory e.g. darix -- openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux openSUSE is good for you www.opensuse.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-buildservice+help@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Christoph Thiel -
Cristian Rodriguez R. -
Donnie S Bhayangkara -
Marcus Rueckert -
Robert Schiele