| 1 |
>>>>> On Sun, 1 May 2011, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Since most ( if not all ) of us use the same message on the |
| 4 |
> Changelog and on the commit log, it probably worth the effort of |
| 5 |
> having the rsync servers create the Changelogs before populate the |
| 6 |
> portage tree. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
A separate ChangeLog has the advantage that entries for trivial |
| 9 |
changes can be omitted. Most people wouldn't want to read entries |
| 10 |
about comment changes, for example. Also entries can be edited, which |
| 11 |
is not possible if the ChangeLog is generated from commit messages. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Having the servers do that, will also allow us to provide cut down |
| 14 |
> Changelogs ( lets say keep that last 10 entries ) so we can provide |
| 15 |
> a more minimal portage tree, size wise. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Ten is way too small. Chances are that after one round of |
| 18 |
stabilisations the ChangeLog entry for the last real change to the |
| 19 |
package will be gone. We should keep at least one year (better two) |
| 20 |
of history, because our aim is that users' systems should still be |
| 21 |
upgradeable after this time. And IMHO emerge -l should give the user |
| 22 |
the full list of changes since his last update. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Ulrich |
Archives