F-14 Branched report: 20100923 changes
a.badger at gmail.com
Fri Sep 24 17:32:26 UTC 2010
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 05:43:47PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 02:44:34PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 07:01:16PM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> >> > Is it really necessary to include entire package change logs in the
> >> > rpm changelog? What is wrong with referencing either the included
> >> > changelog or a URL to a changelog that people can go and reference. I
> >> > remember this being discussed ages ago but I'm not sure if there was a
> >> > packaging policy instigated.
> >> Along the same lines, why should we have RPM %changelog at all? The
> >> git repo should maintain the changelog which can be automatically
> >> integrated with the binary RPM at build time. At the moment we have
> >> the same information in at least 2 places.
> > We need to have the rpm changelog in the rpm so that the end user's can see
> > it.
> For the fact that its gone from version X to version Y yes.
Actually, this is normally reflected in the package version which is quite
> For the
> actual application changed between version X and version Y they can
> see the ChangeLog that's in the %doc or alternatively check the
> release notes for the new version upstream (which can be easily
> provided as a link in the rpm changelog).
rpm -q --changelog
repoquery -q --changelog
Very handy for asking and answering the questions like:
foobar started segfaulting. yum history tells me I updated it, libbaz, and
libzardoz. Any changes in those that could have caused this?
I'm having problems with foobar not being able to connect to https://.
I wonder if the new update in updates-testing might fix that?
> I just don't see the point
> in duplicating hundreds of line of upstream release notes in the rpm
> changelog when all that's actually changed in the rpm is that we've
> gone from release X to release Y.
I agree that duplicating hundreds of lines is not productive. To me the rpm
changelog should give me enough information to know if I might be on the
right track when I ask the questions above. Having hundreds of lines of
changelog per entry is counter-productive to that goal:: If I have to wade
through hundreds of lines for each of foobar, libbaz, and libzardoz I might
well miss that one of the changelog entries addressed the problem I'm
The rpm changelog should be more like NEWS than a changelog; and usually
a summary of NEWS, at that. (imho, no packaging guidelines currently
mandate this, etc.)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100924/fabf0af5/attachment.bin
More information about the devel