On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I can't personally conceive of a case in which it would make sense to simply > have some kind of changelog as the update description. That is not what the > description is for. Well, this is what I do for nodejs updates. I figure since that's good enough for all the people who install .EXEs and .DMGs then it's good enough for people installing Fedora RPMs too, right? Otherwise all I could think of to put there would be: "This fixes some random bugs. Visit http://nodejs.org/path/to/changelog/ to see what they are." I think just including the list of fixes from upstream instead of forcing them to go to a link to see the same list of ~3 fixes is a lot nicer. But, the changelogs I put there are pretty short and sweet [1] (as befitting the stable branch of a programming language interpreter). Perhaps you are thinking of ridiculously long git changelogs or something? I do agree that the RPM changelog is completely useless in the case of most of my packages, and if there is something interesting there it would benefit from a slightly longer description in the update summary rather than some magical automatic inclusion of the RPM changelog. -T.C. [1] https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2013-11337/libuv-0.10.11-1.fc19,nodejs-0.10.12-1.fc19 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
