On 11.03.2013 17:06, Jared K. Smith wrote:
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Michael Catanzaro
<mike.catanzaro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Perhaps the update policy should have a guideline on the minimum amount
of information required in this description. E.g. "update to latest
upstream version" might be a perfectly acceptable description for Fedora
given the fast pace of updates, but I don't think users should ever be
seeing "no update information available" and especially not "here is
where you give an explanation of your update." (And I've seen this one
multiple times within the past couple of weeks.)
I tend to agree here. That being said, most of my package updates are
something along the lines of "Update to upstream 2.5 release" -- would
you find that descriptive enough, or still lacking in detail?
--
Jared Smith
Just an idea: maybe we could introduce the convention of including a
link to the upstream changelog in the update description? For instance
by inviting package maintainers to paste such a link in an apposite
field when doing a fedpkg update? While it's true that users can look up
that information on their own, usually package maintainers already know
where the upstream changelog can be found, whereas users might need to
do some searching.
Sandro
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
