Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Peter Volkov <pva@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 08:30:54
Message-Id: 1320049667.17148.37.camel@tablet
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08 by "Michał Górny"
В Пнд, 31/10/2011 в 09:14 +0100, Michał Górny пишет:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:43:49 +0400 > Peter Volkov <pva@g.o> wrote: > > > В Срд, 26/10/2011 в 18:35 +0200, Michał Górny пишет: > > > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200 > > > Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: > > > > > > In less than two weeks, the council will meet again. This is the > > > > time to raise and prepare items that the council should put on > > > > the agenda to vote on. > > > > > > As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require > > > developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries > > > and commit messages. > > > > I don't see how this logic may work in case you need to modify > > Changelog, so ... wontfix :) > > 'Need' is a very bad word here. I'd rather use 'have a wannabe'.
We have and use this feature now so... better word should be "must" until somebody provides very valid reasons to drop it. Speaking about your reasons:
> 1) easier migration to autogenerated ChangeLogs if we want that at > some point,
Still questionable need.
> 2) better availability of the information (right now, looking up > changes sometimes involves checking both CVS log and ChangeLog message > to see what actually happened),
Was discussed many times with the resolution: they should be different.
> 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.
In the spirit of Gentoo to fix this issue we just need to improve our tools and the first step, moving echangelog into repoman, is already done: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=337853 With best regards, -- Peter.