Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Hans de Graaff <graaff@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [git migration] The problem of ChangeLog generation
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 06:25:25
Message-Id: 1270621502.26456.7.camel@localhost
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [git migration] The problem of ChangeLog generation by Richard Freeman
1 On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 09:06 -0400, Richard Freeman wrote:
2 > Why not just get rid of the in-tree Changelogs entirely? The scm logs
3 > already document this information, so why have it in a file?
4 >
5 > It seems like the main purpose for it is for end-users to have some idea
6 > what changed in an ebuild. However, in my experience the upstream
7 > changes are far more impactful than the ebuild changes, and those aren't
8 > in the Changelogs at all.
10 I pretty much always use the -l option of portage to include the
11 pertinent changes in the ChangeLog, because this is the only way to know
12 about any changes before the package is merged. Yes, the NEWS from the
13 package usually contains a lot more detail, but I won't be able to read
14 it until after the fact. In my experience plenty of ChangeLogs in our
15 tree at least briefly document what changed in the package as opposed to
16 the ebuild.
18 Hans


File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature