Greg Freemyer 於 2012-3-7 上午7:44 寫道：

On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Marguerite Su wrote:

...

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 5:06 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...

All,

I just updated perl-Image-Exiftool in my home project.

I dumped all the changes from the change log into our *.changes file, but its 200 lines of info for just the last 6 months.

Should I leave it that way, or replace it with a URL?

https://build.opensuse.org/package/view_file?file=perl-Image-ExifTool.changes&package=perl-Image-ExifTool&project=home%3Agregfreemyer%3ATools-for-forensic-boot-cd&rev=2e1a32ff0ebfbf51a109c50ef48bfd3a

Thanks Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Hi, Greg,

1. I think *.changes is where your changes for spec file go to. there's a scriptlet "changes2spec" will write *.changes to %changelog section of spec file.

upstream changes should go to %files:

%files %defattr(-,root,root) %doc ChangeLog

where will be placed under /usr/share/doc/packages/%{name}/. it means you don't need to merge. ChangeLog is the changelog for developers, for the source code, *.changes is the changelog for packager, for the distributive binary packge itself.

2. all changes from upstream in source code can be summarized as one line in *.changes, which is:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tue Mar 6 23:11:33 UTC 2012 - i#marguerite.su

- update version 2.0 (or "initial package 1.0")

Marguerite,

In general, I believe if the changelog for a upgraded package is just a few lines long, we are encouraged to add it to the *.changes file.

In this case, the ChangeLog entry is only ~ 10 lines per release, but upstream is doing a new release roughly every 10 days!.

So there have been 12 upstream releases since I last updated the source code in Sept. 2011.

I think I'll try the summarization route with a url for details.

Note, the "Changes" file from upstream is already in the %doc section of %files for this package, so I'll mention that as well in the *.changes file.

Greg

Greg， A URL is just fine, I sometimes paste it to .changes, directing here or bugzilla. To keep .changes clean, you can use URL short service like is.gd As you said, every release is short, but in total it is huge, anyway it's huge, so should be cleaned. Mplayer has four or five line of changes, but its spec file doesn't include them at all. Because it's a long live package has 50% doc in spec file. If it's there, I think no need to especially mention it, because every packager knows where to find it, while end users couldn't see your spec file at all. Marguerite -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Claudio Freire 於 2012-3-7 上午11:28 寫道：

2012/3/7 Marguerite Su :

...

If it's there, I think no need to especially mention it, because every packager knows where to find it, while end users couldn't see your spec file at all.

End users do see the .changes file. You can see it with yast.

I check it regularly after updates, and only wish I could check *before* updating.

Claudio Oh? Never aware of that, thank you. I am not sure, but seems spec file is used to act as binary RPM's meta data. Yast2 may just fetch some parts of it for preview. A beginner's theory, if wrong just LOL. Marguerite-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Yamaban wrote:

On Wed, 7 Mar 2012 04:28, Claudio Freire wrote:

...

2012/3/7 Marguerite Su :

...

If it's there, I think no need to especially mention it, because every packager knows where to find it, while end users couldn't see your spec file at all.

End users do see the .changes file. You can see it with yast.

I check it regularly after updates, and only wish I could check *before* updating.

Maybe not inside yast, but if the .rpm is available (even via http://) them you can use "rpm --changelog -p " without installing the package first.

I use rpm -p ... befor installing a new package that I do not know good enough to fly blind.

Esp. the (soft) options :  --suggests, --recommends, --enhances, --supplements are helpful, as only the hard options  --requires, --obsoletes, --conflicts are visible inside yast.

Maybe there is room for an enhancement in yast in this point?

But overall, the most interesting info in .changes are: - why (upstream version, compiler-change, distro-specific-patch, error-patch, packager-mod-patch, etc) - when was the change (iso-date-time) - who has done the change.

Everything else, e.g. the content of version-change should reside in %doc to keep .changes clear, non-confusing, and fast to read.

A link (url) to upstream Changes-log, bugzilla entries, and such are welcome in my opinion.

More or less it's a packager log. Who-has-when-done-what-and-why.

Thats my 2ct. Critic is welcome, flames are not constructive.

 - Yamaban.

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

Today I reviewed the specfile guideline wiki, and found a warning in changelog section as follows: "Warning: Packages in openSUSE:Factory require that changes are listed with every new upstream release, and if upstream does not provide any changelog information, you must still provide that information in the .changes file, such as "update to 1.2.3: no changelog available" Under this theory, what we all think is wrong is actually right. Factory encourages us to copy and paste upstream changelog (changes are listed with every new upstream release) But I never ever received group email from coolo taking about this policy change. and I never be rejected by not listing upstream changes. so is this warning fake/misleading and should be deleted from wiki? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org

...

...

On 2012-3-9 at 6:57, Philipp Thomas wrote: On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 16:06:07 -0500, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...

Should I leave it that way, or replace it with a URL?

With a huge list of changes, I usually either try to shorten the list, either by removing anything not related to Linux or everything build related or, if that doesn't suffice, use the last set of chganges and mark the change log %doc and then state in the .changes file to look there for further changes.

I agree with this and usually did as this. It is not friendly for end-user that we only state "update to x.x.x", but it is also annoying and not much useful for end-user to keep everything there if the changes are huge. Not every user will review the changes before he does the update (at least as I know, most of the Chinese openSUSE users will not review the changes), but if some of them want, we can provide them where to find the detailed changelog file. Thanks, Joey -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org