Lack of update information

[Horst H. von Brand]

Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:
> Chris Weyl wrote:
> > Neither is it difficult to rig something to point automatically at an
> > included package changelog.  Before we mandate a new manual task,
> > can't we at least try an automated approach first?

> The included changelog is often way too detailed (especially FSF-style
> changelogs, see e.g. the GCC one) and it also doesn't give the rationale
> why the update is being pushed. And there are also many packages where the
> changelog is provided on some web page, not as part of the source code. So
> this is no substitute for doing it properly.

I for one don't think asking (not demanding!) a short paragraph giving the
rationale of doing the new package is too much to ask. The packager must
have some reason for pushing the new version, particularly for a released
branch.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                    Fono: +56 32 2654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria             +56 32 2654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile 2340000       Fax:  +56 32 2797513