On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Mads Martin Joergensen wrote:
* Richard Guenther <rguenther@suse.de> [Jan 30. 2009 07:57]:
I've noticed that a lot of packages going in to Factory does not have "proper" Changelog entries as explained to me (ie, copy redundant information from NEWS/Changelog entries upstream and put it in <packagename>.changes).
My question is, do we have a project wide policy for this, or would it be enough to add what has been done by the package updater (ie, update to version x.y.z, add/remove patch etc)?
Personally, I am in favor of not having to put it what changed upstream, since in most cases, this would be contained in a NEWS/Changelog file anyway.
Well, there have been requests and (internal?) policy that an entry with just
* New upstream version 1.2.3
is not appropriate and that we indeed _should_ paste in (IMHO redundant and not appropriate for the rmp .changes) contents from NEWS/Changelog.
So - we are just doing what is requested.
Yes, I think that the rpm .changes is to document _packaging_ changes and not package changes.
Back when I was in-house I advocated to copy Changes, NEWS, whereever the changelog for the software itself is, and I still do. It's very convienient to be able to access this information when off-line, etc.
For sheer convienience it's great.
Yeah. Sort of. For convenience I like the Debian way that has /usr/share/doc/$package/changelog.Debian in addition to recommended packaging of /usr/share/doc/$package/{ChangeLog,NEWS,README} (or whatever it is called) The changelog.Debian mentions package-container changes _and_ software changes that fix reported bugs (with a #1234 marking, Debian auto-closes bugs on checkin via parsing the changelog.Debian). Richard. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@opensuse.org