Le mercredi 24 octobre 2018 à 08:42 +0200, Nicolas Mailhot a écrit :
> Le mercredi 24 octobre 2018 à 00:52 +0200, Robert-André Mauchin a
> écrit :
> > On mardi 23 octobre 2018 23:47:05 CEST you wrote:
> > > On mardi 23 octobre 2018 22:43:16 CEST Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > > Anyway, since no one answers when I list the possible fixes and
> > > > ask to
> > > > choose between them, I fixed the Fedora spec files myself.
> > > >
> > > > Feel free to reintroduce %gosetup calls if you really want them,
> > > > once
> > > > the %gosetup implementation has been fixed.
> > >
> > > Thanks for doing but you messed up the bumping of all the
> > > %changelog
> > > entries.
> >
> > Used this Fish script to fix my SPEC:
> >
>
> This does not need any fixing, it may not be the changelog format
> you're
> used to, but it's one of the changelog styles rpm understands, which
> is
> used by packages in Fedora, and which was documented at one point in
> guidelines (no idea where the corresponding paragraph is today with
> the
> doc.fedoraproject changes)

Concretely the

* <date> <name> <mail>
- version-release
- changes

format is a tad more flexible and allows publishing several fixes in a
row without duplicating date lines

* <date> <name> <mail>
- version-release
- changes
- version-release
-
changes

and so on

And, our infra does not care if a changelog uses mixed style or not,
since mass rebuilds will drop changelog entries in a single format in
all Fedora specs, so you have many mixed style changelogs in the
distribution today.

(of course it's your specs, you can rewrite changelog entries any way
that makes you feel better)

Regards,

--
Nicolas Mailhot