| 1 |
On 09/11/2010 10:31 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 11-09-2010 21:29:22 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 3 |
>>>>>>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Petteri Räty wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>>>> Update EAPI. Fix dependencies. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>>> This message does not tell why the EPREFIX stuff was removed. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Come on. EAPI was updated to 3, and removal of the EPREFIX assignments |
| 10 |
>> are part of that. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I thought the same initially, then I realised that Petteri probably |
| 13 |
> meant that "Update EAPI" doesn't really say anything. Mention EAPI=3 |
| 14 |
> in the commit message and it is all clear. (From the ChangeLog |
| 15 |
> perspective an EAPI bump/update shouldn't really matter much as it |
| 16 |
> shouldn't change anything for the user.) |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I was thinking it could have been something along the lines of "Fix |
| 20 |
dependencies and cleanup the ebuild by making use of EAPI 3." For me the |
| 21 |
connection between EAPI 3 and the prefix was not obvious so probably not |
| 22 |
for everyone else either. I agree with Fabian that ChangeLog should not |
| 23 |
be verbose about things that don't affect users in any way. For that |
| 24 |
kind of stuff you can be verbose in the CVS commit message. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Regards, |
| 27 |
Petteri |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Petteri |
Archives