Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:11:05
Message-Id: CAEdQ38ExNaAL8UVZWKBKQXknyk8DXAUhz1KM5Q2W9ZW0pyJumA@mail.gmail.com
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote:
> El mié, 26-10-2011 a las 19:15 +0200, Fabian Groffen escribió: >> On 26-10-2011 19:11:24 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: >> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200 >> > Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: >> > >> > > > 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries. >> > > >> > > Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and >> > > previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly >> > > change. >> > >> > I meant the useless ChangeLog messages done by developers on purpose >> > like 'ignore this'. >> >> Oh, you can just edit them, and "fix" the ChangeLog. >> >> I hope people will keep on looking for those, and contact the developer >> in question to ask him/her to change his/her behaviour. >> >> > > Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to > simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like: >  26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild > > And simply that > > Pros: > - People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could > be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be > written in ChangeLog. > - Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated > with "-" previous removed file. > > What do you think? > > From my point of view, if we don't try to reach a consensus, we will > expend time on things to enforce a policy that we could probably expend > on other tasks and, then, maybe all of us should try to stop being so > strict and try to give in a bit (not sure if it's the way in English to > say "ceder" :S)
I think that makes a lot of sense. Matt