[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: changelog format



On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 15:29 -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> David Cantrell wrote:
> > I view the RPM changelog as mostly fluff for end-user consumption.  We 
> > [the packagers] can summarize the main points of that release, note 
> > bug numbers addressed, and other major points for that iteration of 
> > the package.
> >
> I use rpm's changelog the way David does.  I consider the one in the RPM 
> to be the formal, end-user-facing record.  The CVS changelog is where 
> things like "EVR bump for chainbuild", "Fixed typo in summary" or "Shit, 
> forgot a BuildRequires" go.

I don't know how official the guideline at
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join
is, but it states that the CVS changelog format is the same as for the
spec file changelog.

The CVS changelog is indeed a bit redundant since everything important
is already in the spec changelog, thus it might be used in a freer
fashion.
-- 
Jussi Lehtola
Fedora Project Contributor
jussilehtola fedoraproject org


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]