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

Re: changelogs in packages and space use

On Thu, 2007-08-30 at 23:29 -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> seth vidal wrote:
> > You're right - no conclusion - but I guess I should put this to the
> > packaging committee to get it added to the criteria - if we nuke
> > everything but the last years worth from the %changelog and we do that
> > as something useful to do for every release - then we'll be able to keep
> > it pruned down and we'll still keep the history.
> > 
> > People on the packaging committe - does that sound fair?
> > 
> > -sv
> I'm always worried about making it harder to get the history related to
> the running code... (I guess there's still always cvs history, but...)
> I'd like to see all changelog entries remain that are related to patches
> still carried in the src.rpm - and not thrown away just because that
> patch was added > 1 year ago.  Much harder to automate, though... If
> there's a policy that says I can trim my own changelogs with that
> criteria, I'll gladly do it.  (Maybe the automated trimmer could only
> nuke old changelog entries if the changelog is above a certain size
> threshold?)

So my first question is this: Why are we carrying a patch for >1yr?
Shouldn't it be being pushed to upstream?

My only problem with letting the changelogs be cherry picked like this
is b/c it is would be hard for people to know when to look elsewhere.
Having the changelog difference be a hard number relative to the latest
date in the package changelog would make it more consistent to know when
to look elsewhere.

Having a consistent location for what is 'elsewhere' is probably also


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