On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 15:29 -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > David Cantrell wrote: > > 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. I don't know how official the guideline at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join is, but it states that the CVS changelog format is the same as for the spec file changelog. The CVS changelog is indeed a bit redundant since everything important is already in the spec changelog, thus it might be used in a freer fashion. -- Jussi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussilehtola@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
