Rahul Sundaram píše v Út 27. 01. 2009 v 14:36 +0530: > Dan Horák wrote: > > Both sides in the "Lack if update information" thread are true. The > > presented information about changes is almost useless for the user, but > > rewriting the upstream changelogs into bodhi is a superfluous burden for > > the maintainers. There is, in my opinion, a technical solution for this > > issue that can make both sides happy. > > I didn't ask for upstream changelogs to be rewritten within bodhi. If > there is a upstream changelog, just adding a reference would be very > helpful. If that can be automated, that's great. > > > And it is new "ChangeLog" tag in RPM. It should be an URL pointing to > > upstream changelog and GUI package management tools can open a browser > > window to show the content, like they do for the home page. > > This might solve part of the problem. It doesn't solve the problem where > downstream bugs are not referred to or closed for example. The thing is > that this process requires human intelligence and cannot be completely > automated in all cases. There is some support in Makefile.common to transfer bug numbers from package changelog to bodhi. Dan -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
