Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-packaging (186 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-packaging] Changelogs need changes?
  • From: Stephan Kulow <coolo@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 12:13:13 +0100
  • Message-id: <200902251213.14104.coolo@xxxxxxx>
Am Dienstag 24 Februar 2009 schrieb anicka@xxxxxxx:
I think that we spent countless hours of time working on something that no
one is interested in. Even its very presence might be annoying in some
cases. Should we really continue doing it? Would not be better to just go
back several years and start to do it like others do it?

I have to admit I was never a big fan either. And what it makes especially
strange is that we allow "update to x.y" for packages where upstream does
not provide NEWS.

While my job is certainly easier to go look into .changes file to see
important changes that are interesting for checking, but I'm for sure not
interested in a detailed upstream bug log.

And you're not the first one to complain either. What I wonder: how can make
sure the maintainer _knows_ about the changes of upstream? E.g. I updated
exiv2 to a new version as I fixed gcc 4.4 compilation. And I did read through
the changelog, but still I didn't spot the little "[design] Publish only API
objects in the installed header files." - which broke a dozen other packages.

No idea how to go forward, there are people that like it and others that
don't, but it means work for almost anyone. I would shorten the policy to
"important NEWS" should be listened. Then it's up to the maintainer if it
"Force bytes in all the format_* methods" belongs in a rpm changelog or not.
Because most users will simply shrug ;)

Greetings, Stephan

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
References