Updates lacking descriptions

[Kevin Kofler]

Michael Schwendt wrote:
> Some package maintainers include upstream's summary of the changes in the
> source code in their package %changelogs. I consider that as much too
> detailed [and irrelevant to the majority of RPM package users]. Those few
> who really have interest in reviewing low-level changes can take a look
> at included ChangeLog files.

AIUI, the package changelog only really needs to contain what you changed in 
the specfile, i.e. "update to [e.g.] 2.0.3". The Bodhi summary, however, 
should say something like:
| An update to the bugfix release 2.0.3, fixing bugs and adding a few minor
| features. See http://www.example.com/upstream-changelog for details.
or:
| An update to the bugfix release 2.0.3, fixing the following bugs:
| http://bugzilla.example.com/upstream/12345 - need to frob the widget
[etc.]
| and adding support for the <foobar> tag in the WTFML parser.

On the other hand, things like "use %{_includedir} instead of 
%{_prefix}/include" belong only into the specfile changelog, users won't 
give a darn. (Corollary: It makes no sense whatsoever to push an update if 
that's all you changed.)

> Overall, however, what updates need is feedback from actual testers before
> they are marked stable.

That's really a separate issue from the lack of details.

        Kevin Kofler