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 1QUFIq-0003zm-Dx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 08 Jun 2011 09:43:56 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D931C1C06B; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:43:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB63E1C008 for ; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:43:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiocik.lan (87-205-62-108.adsl.inetia.pl [87.205.62.108]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 361741B4028; Wed, 8 Jun 2011 09:43:19 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:43:35 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBHw7Nybnk=?= To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: djc@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild Message-ID: <20110608114335.44a97df5@pomiocik.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <20110516033002.207452004F@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <201106071553.27793.vapier@gentoo.org> <4DEE8E61.7010109@gentoo.org> <201106071709.34494.vapier@gentoo.org> <4DEF407F.50300@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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-SHA256; boundary="Sig_/bmLjeq+.ya98+KHh1FSDxqO"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: a08f054b66afb574b35ac3c1cfacb973 --Sig_/bmLjeq+.ya98+KHh1FSDxqO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 8 Jun 2011 11:28:47 +0200 Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:27, Patrick Lauer > wrote: > > In all cases I want one resource to look at, viewcvs is a horrible > > and slow interface. So it does make sense to keep changelogs filled > > with information - maybe automation is needed, I don't have a > > strong opinion either way. But don't make me do more work because > > you are lazy, that never ends well. >=20 > IMO we should just make repoman commit update the ChangeLog. What if we wanted to remove ChangeLogs then for autogeneration? Will we require all devs to quickly update their portage versions? --=20 Best regards, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny --Sig_/bmLjeq+.ya98+KHh1FSDxqO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEIAAYFAk3vREsACgkQfXuS5UK5QB3z6AP7B2gore4MwsajPAwtZjxF/O1Z v3Z/b0wnCqR9FShggC0spN0jPme1YX9hTFzVzteQCr/bjvA8fKU8v8/sriGlSlZX jNPSgviQNi50WyTTHCX8L99LPlIfa3h/6q3V5nP5BjS8cBCkYdWAvlx9fv0ysvhJ vJNxtR5nnPPszwQBq9o= =mSrH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/bmLjeq+.ya98+KHh1FSDxqO--