On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:46:27 -0500, Orcan wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 12:12 PM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> > On 2/26/2010 10:55, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Garrett Holmstrom wrote:
> >>> On 2/26/2010 7:26, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> >>>> Another annoying issue is updates with no explanations. There is a
> >>>> "Notes" field in bodhi that many people just ignore for an unknown
> >>>> reason. Any update with less than a specified number of characters
> >>>> (~40) in the Notes should also be banned.
> >>>
> >>> What if bodhi were to pre-populate that field with the update's
> >>> changelog entry so there's at least something there by default?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Well, that's better than nothing. Still the specfile changelog is the
> >> changelog of the specfile, not the changelog of the software.
> >
> > It's not a packager's job to rehash upstream's changelog.
>
> That is the point I completely disagree. It is a packager's very job
> to rehash upstream's changelogs. If a packager can't -at the very
> least- give a brief report of what he has accomplished, then he should
> reconsider his adequacy. At the minimal, a URL link to the upstream
> changelog should be given in the Notes. If that doesn't exist, the
> related parts from the changelog file can be copied and pasted. Not
> all users are aware of /usr/share/doc/%{name}-%{version}/ directories.
Please move this into a separate thread.
Btw, I think you're mistaken.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
