| 1 |
On 26-10-2011 20:05:05 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 2 |
> Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to |
| 3 |
> simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like: |
| 4 |
> 26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> And simply that |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Pros: |
| 9 |
> - People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could |
| 10 |
> be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be |
| 11 |
> written in ChangeLog. |
| 12 |
> - Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated |
| 13 |
> with "-" previous removed file. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> What do you think? |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why. |
| 18 |
That's the idea of the ChangeLog file. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Compare: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
old |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
remove for security bug ... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
[this is a placeholder, please ignore] |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
^ |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Version bump |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Remove superseeded versions |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Drop due to dep on <libpng-1.5 |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 39 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives