1 |
El mié, 26-10-2011 a las 22:58 +0200, Fabian Groffen escribió: |
2 |
> On 26-10-2011 20:05:05 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
3 |
> > Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to |
4 |
> > simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like: |
5 |
> > 26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > And simply that |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> > Pros: |
10 |
> > - People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could |
11 |
> > be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be |
12 |
> > written in ChangeLog. |
13 |
> > - Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated |
14 |
> > with "-" previous removed file. |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > What do you think? |
17 |
> |
18 |
> You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why. |
19 |
> That's the idea of the ChangeLog file. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Compare: |
22 |
> |
23 |
> old |
24 |
> |
25 |
> remove for security bug ... |
26 |
> |
27 |
> [this is a placeholder, please ignore] |
28 |
> |
29 |
> ^ |
30 |
> |
31 |
> Version bump |
32 |
> |
33 |
> Remove superseeded versions |
34 |
> |
35 |
> Drop due to dep on <libpng-1.5 |
36 |
> |
37 |
> |
38 |
|
39 |
But most of times we simply remove old versions because they are old |
40 |
and, in that case, there is no need to add "Drop old" (as I am currently |
41 |
doing) |