Björn Persson wrote:
> I gather I'm expected to write the changelog in a spec file by hand. How
> strict are the requirements on the format of changelog entries? Are they
> meant to be machine-readable? Is the format specified anywhere? The
> packaging guidelines document contains four examples. Examples are good
> but they're no replacement for a specification.
The format is fairly straightforward:
* first line (elements separated by spaces):
- asterisk
- date in Wkd Mth dd yyyy format (e.g. Mon Apr 21 2009)
(if the day is just 1 digit, you can write any of "1", " 1" or "01")
- your name
- your e-mail address between angle brackets ('<' and '>')
- optionally a dash
- the EVR (Epoch-Version-Release) of the package, without the disttag,
e.g. 3.5.10-1 for 3.5.10-1.fc11, 3.5.10-1.1 for 3.5.10-1.fc11.1,
6:4.2.2-1 if the package has Epoch 6 (the Epoch is specified only
if present and you use a ':' between Epoch and Version)
* any other lines (elements separated by spaces):
- dash (plain ASCII dash, please don't use some strange UTF-8 character)
- text describing your change
- if your change doesn't fit in one line, start a new line and indent it
with 2 spaces, so it is aligned with the text above (which has a dash
and a space)
- bugs should be referenced as (#666666) (or, if there's any chance of
confusion, (rh#666666)) for Fedora bugs and as (foo#666666), where foo
is the relevant bug tracker (e.g. kde, sf, fdo etc.), for upstream bugs
Kevin Kofler
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
