Best practices wrt. Changelog entries in spec file (upstream vs. specfile)

Michael Schwendt bugs.michael at
Sun Apr 30 16:13:47 UTC 2006

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 10:53:04 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

> >>>>> "JS" == Joost Soeterbroek <joost at> writes:
> JS> I do think it is relevant to include upstream changelog also.
> Generally you include the upstream changelog as %doc.  I suppose it
> would be a good idea to include a summary of major changes in your
> package %changelog and it might be worth discussing whether it should
> be mandatory when the changes might negatively impact users, as in the
> case of incompatible config files changes or the like.  Some people
> actually look at the packages before they install them.

You can look _into_ rpms just fine and skim over any included
ChangeLog, NEWS, README files.

The spec %changelog should really only cover important changes in the
packaging itself. That includes comments about added/removed patches, the
corresponding bugzilla ticket numbers, major rewrite-attempts of
scriptlets or other spec portions (which may result in regression).
If a version upgrade fixes several bugs which have been reported
to you, it's added value if you mention those bug numbers, too.

More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list