Quoting Paul Wouters (2012-05-21 02:02:23) > On Fri, 18 May 2012, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 07:07:56PM +0200, Remi Collet wrote: > >> And definitvely, for me, (and probably only for me), git is really > >> not a good tool for spec maintenance. > > > > Not duplicating the changelog would help. There's little reason to > > have a changelog in git which is then manually copied into %changelog. > > Agreed. changelog and version field conflicts are 90% of my cherry-pick > conflicts. > > I would be in favour of no longer maintaining a changelog in the spec file OK. Many of us agree that rpm changelogs could be generated from git. Now there are multiple approaches. As was said before Mageia/Mandriva have been doing it for a while. However I dislike approach of specific commit messages that will "remove" commit from changelog. Instead my proposal (that I am willing to work on with relengs/infra): * If there is a changelog in spec we assume packager keeps its changelog manually so we leave it be. This gives everyone time to adjust as they see fit. * By default add every git commit message except merges to rpm changelog on koji. I.e. no action from packager necessary * If a git commit is tagged in a specific way, omit from rpm changelog. What I mean by "tagged" is a git tag, in form of let's say "silentXXX". Where XXX has to be unique, but that can be figured out by fedpkg easily. The way I see it, this could be relatively painless migration where packagers would not have to change their workflows immediately. Does anyone have any strong opinions against this approach? Note that I am not asking you to express your dislike for git changelog generation. You will have time for that later for sure -- Stanislav Ochotnicky <sochotnicky@xxxxxxxxxx> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
