Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:09:35
Message-Id: BANLkTi=s5YW_p82StctCqYJHswsB6ujPiQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild by Mike Frysinger
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 17:32:03 Matt Turner wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> > On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 16:47:29 Dane Smith wrote: >> >> To be perfectly blunt, no small part of what caused this current fiasco >> >> was this exact attitude. I don't like the current policy either, it's >> >> far too wide. However, if you go back and look at why it even *got* to >> >> council, it was because you (and others), decided that they weren't >> >> going to give any regard to the requests of some of their fellow devs >> >> about ChangeLogging removals. >> > >> > how is this relevant at all ?  i dont find value in these entries, other >> > people do.  my attitude towards how worthless they are has 0 bearing on >> > the policy towards creating it. >> >> Plenty of people have, successfully I though, argued that removal >> Changelog entries _are_ useful and have cited relevant situations. >> >> Make a case about how the current policy is stupid in that it requires >> changelog entries for trivial whitespace changes or for documenting >> removals of packages even when it means the changelog is deleted as >> well, but for god sake, stop the nonsense about documenting version >> removals being useless. > > that wasnt my point, although it is a good one.  the idea that policy exists > because i disagree with others is bunk.  whether it be people complaining to > other devs to do XYZ or the council makes it official XYZ, there is still a > policy XYZ. > -mike
There _was_ a policy before, but it was unclear about documenting version removals and arguably didn't require it, so after a few developers (you've been often mentioned as one of them) refused to document version removals in the changelog, even after prompting on gentoo-dev@ the council fixed the policy. Of course the policy doesn't exist simply because you disagree with others, the policy exists (and was instituted/clarified) because you wouldn't do something that most developers and users find useful and thought was already policy, even after being asked. Why does this have to be such a struggle. It's pretty clear that the policy is going to be changed again to fix the oversight of silly situations like I mentioned previously, but there's a near unanimous agreement that documenting version removals _is_ useful. So, please, just start doing it. It's really not a lot of work. I'm sure something more can be done to make this more automated, but until then please just fucking do it and let's stop all this silliness. Matt

Replies