Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1597 bytes --]

El mié, 26-10-2011 a las 19:15 +0200, Fabian Groffen escribió:
> On 26-10-2011 19:11:24 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200
> > Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > > 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.
> > > 
> > > Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and
> > > previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly
> > > change.
> > 
> > I meant the useless ChangeLog messages done by developers on purpose
> > like 'ignore this'.
> 
> Oh, you can just edit them, and "fix" the ChangeLog.
> 
> I hope people will keep on looking for those, and contact the developer
> in question to ask him/her to change his/her behaviour.
> 
> 

Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to
simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like:
  26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild

And simply that

Pros:
- People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could
be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be
written in ChangeLog. 
- Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated
with "-" previous removed file.

What do you think?

From my point of view, if we don't try to reach a consensus, we will
expend time on things to enforce a policy that we could probably expend
on other tasks and, then, maybe all of us should try to stop being so
strict and try to give in a bit (not sure if it's the way in English to
say "ceder" :S)

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]