1 |
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> El mié, 26-10-2011 a las 19:15 +0200, Fabian Groffen escribió: |
3 |
>> On 26-10-2011 19:11:24 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
4 |
>> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200 |
5 |
>> > Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
6 |
>> > |
7 |
>> > > > 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries. |
8 |
>> > > |
9 |
>> > > Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and |
10 |
>> > > previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly |
11 |
>> > > change. |
12 |
>> > |
13 |
>> > I meant the useless ChangeLog messages done by developers on purpose |
14 |
>> > like 'ignore this'. |
15 |
>> |
16 |
>> Oh, you can just edit them, and "fix" the ChangeLog. |
17 |
>> |
18 |
>> I hope people will keep on looking for those, and contact the developer |
19 |
>> in question to ask him/her to change his/her behaviour. |
20 |
>> |
21 |
>> |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to |
24 |
> simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like: |
25 |
> 26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild |
26 |
> |
27 |
> And simply that |
28 |
> |
29 |
> Pros: |
30 |
> - People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could |
31 |
> be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be |
32 |
> written in ChangeLog. |
33 |
> - Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated |
34 |
> with "-" previous removed file. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> What do you think? |
37 |
> |
38 |
> From my point of view, if we don't try to reach a consensus, we will |
39 |
> expend time on things to enforce a policy that we could probably expend |
40 |
> on other tasks and, then, maybe all of us should try to stop being so |
41 |
> strict and try to give in a bit (not sure if it's the way in English to |
42 |
> say "ceder" :S) |
43 |
|
44 |
I think that makes a lot of sense. |
45 |
|
46 |
Matt |