Michael Schwendt wrote: > Some package maintainers include upstream's summary of the changes in the > source code in their package %changelogs. I consider that as much too > detailed [and irrelevant to the majority of RPM package users]. Those few > who really have interest in reviewing low-level changes can take a look > at included ChangeLog files. AIUI, the package changelog only really needs to contain what you changed in the specfile, i.e. "update to [e.g.] 2.0.3". The Bodhi summary, however, should say something like: | An update to the bugfix release 2.0.3, fixing bugs and adding a few minor | features. See http://www.example.com/upstream-changelog for details. or: | An update to the bugfix release 2.0.3, fixing the following bugs: | http://bugzilla.example.com/upstream/12345 - need to frob the widget [etc.] | and adding support for the <foobar> tag in the WTFML parser. On the other hand, things like "use %{_includedir} instead of %{_prefix}/include" belong only into the specfile changelog, users won't give a darn. (Corollary: It makes no sense whatsoever to push an update if that's all you changed.) > Overall, however, what updates need is feedback from actual testers before > they are marked stable. That's really a separate issue from the lack of details. Kevin Kofler -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
