[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

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

I meant to send this to fedora-extras list, not fedora-devel list, sorry


Joost Soeterbroek wrote:

I have a question regarding Changelog entries in spec files. When packaging for a new upstream version of a given package you have to deal with 2 different changelog informations:

 1) upstream/source specific changelog information
 2) spec file/packager specific changelog information

I am unsure how best to deal with both of these. The FE guidelines regarding Changelogs in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines only mentions spec file specific changelog info, but says nothing about upstream. I do think it is relevant to include upstream changelog also.

As an example, I have just bumped the heartbeat package in Fedora Extras from 2.0.4-2 to 2.0.5-1. I ended up using a combination of minuses for the package specific changelog entries and indented plusses for the upstream changelog which seemed acceptable to rpmlint, as in:

* Date Name Packager
- package changelog
  + upstream changelog

Example for heartbeat package:

* Thu Apr 27 2006  Joost Soeterbroek <fedora soeterbroek com> - 2.0.5-1
- upstream version 2.0.5
- removed patch2 - ownership of /heartbeat/crm/cib.xml is no longer
  set in cts/CM_LinuxHAv2.py.in
  + Version 2.0.5 - significant bug fixes and a few feature deficits fixed
  + various portability fixes
  + enable GUI to run with pygtk 2.4
  + significant GUI improvements and speedups


Joost <fedora soeterbroek com>

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]