[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)



On Fri, 05 May 2006 10:08:36 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

> >>>>> "AT" == Andreas Thienemann <andreas bawue net> writes:
> 
> AT> Why not simply call rpm directly?
> 
> AT> rpm -qp --changelog \
> AT> http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/extras/5/i386/mod_suphp-0.6.1-1.fc5.i386.rpm
> 
> AT> This should give you the changelog for mod_suphp.
> 
> We've come full circle.  My point was that the changelog is all you
> can see, so you should at least add a note of incompatible changes
> there.

We agree a bit and probably disagree a bit, too. This is not anymore
how this thread started. All boils down to what you mean with "include
a summary of major changes in your package %changelog", since I really
think it is not a good idea to sum up upstream development changes in
the package %changelog in general.

The original post, which started this thread, is not yours. Joost
Soeterbroek suggested

| %changelog
| * Date Name Packager
| - package changelog
|   + upstream changelog

which is not practicable. And with that I loop back to my earlier
replies. ;)


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