David Cantrell wrote:
On 04/20/2009 10:21 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Sun, 2009-04-19 at 23:32 +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
I gather I'm expected to write the changelog in a spec file by hand.
Why is this, BTW? Is there a reason we don't just generate it from CVS
commit messages, beyond "no-one's had time / inclination to implement
it"?
Because there's no forced standard for CVS commit messages. Plus,
each CVS commit in pkgcvs does not necessarily equal a new release or
version increment in the package. At least that's not how I use pkgcvs.
I view the RPM changelog as mostly fluff for end-user consumption. We
[the packagers] can summarize the main points of that release, note
bug numbers addressed, and other major points for that iteration of
the package.
I use rpm's changelog the way David does. I consider the one in the RPM
to be the formal, end-user-facing record. The CVS changelog is where
things like "EVR bump for chainbuild", "Fixed typo in summary" or "Shit,
forgot a BuildRequires" go.
--
in your fear, speak only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
