Draft: simple update description guidelines

[Rahul Sundaram]

Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> On Tuesday, 27 January 2009 at 19:18, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

>> * If there are downstream bugs being fixed or intended to be fixed with 
>> an update, it must be referred within the update. Maintainers can choose 
>> to let bodhi auto close bugs or close it manually as well.
> 
> This is redundant. bodhi has a field for bug numbers and it's pretty
> self-explanatory.
> 
>> * For security update, add CVE information, if one exists.
> 
> As above.

As evident in the number of package updates that don't provide any 
information at all, I think it is helpful and complimentary to existing 
bodhi descriptions. Also many maintainers are not aware that the update 
descriptions are being used by PackageKit. Documenting it properly would 
encourage them.

> Nobody reads these anyway, so what's the point? Yum's changelog plugin is
> much more useful than this proposal will ever be.

I am sure, quite a few people read them since I have answered questions 
on earlier guidelines several times.  Yum changelog plugin displays the 
rpm changelog while PackageKit shows the update description in the 
graphical interface. Both are useful.

Rahul