From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QGU9J-00034Q-4g for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 May 2011 10:45:13 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEF351C08E; Sun, 1 May 2011 10:45:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0710F1C02A for ; Sun, 1 May 2011 10:44:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vereniki.bit-level.net (unknown [83.212.181.146]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pchrist) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D85D81B403F for ; Sun, 1 May 2011 10:44:38 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sun, 1 May 2011 13:44:29 +0300 From: Panagiotis Christopoulos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Devmanual text on ChangeLogs Message-ID: <20110501104429.GA6160@Vereniki.lan> References: <4DBBCC6D.7080504@gentoo.org> <4DBBD02B.3060909@gentoo.org> <20110430203931.GA2414@Vereniki.lan> <4DBD22A7.3080500@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DBD22A7.3080500@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 3c28eb316f9ebfee2495dfe7d8858755 --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 12:06 Sun 01 May , Samuli Suominen wrote: > So not only they are rather useless, and information you can easily get > from sources.gentoo.org, they take your time as well. Then, let's change it to: "Every new file, and modification to existing file should have an entry in ChangeLog. Though not mandatory, it is highly recommended that file removals are also recorded the same way." to keep everyone happy until we deal with changelogs another way or improve the committing process. I suppose most removals happen together with additions, so it's not a big deal.=20 When only a removal happens, it will be in the developer's decision how to handle the ChangeLog (as it was always). Don't get me wrong here. I believe that removals should be recorded. Searching in ChangeLogs for changes is much easier than visiting sources.gentoo.org, it's more formal and you have a complete history of your package. However, I can undestand what Samuli says, it can be frustrating and slow to deal with echangelog when there is a "big commit load". But again, Can it be slower than doing keywording/stabilizations? I don't remember any arch tester to have complained about that but we complain about removals? Maybe it's just my memory.=20 --=20 Panagiotis Christopoulos ( pchrist ) ( Gentoo Lisp Project ) --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAk29OY0ACgkQOsV5uRvANlYJmgCgjLPY1snZB2S6ugZH706mQXoi avoAoIi+a/wt0pfDOT2hnyCAABGhnvZg =1WjW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mP3DRpeJDSE+ciuQ--