Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

[Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>]

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 16:47:29 Dane Smith wrote:
>> To be perfectly blunt, no small part of what caused this current fiasco
>> was this exact attitude. I don't like the current policy either, it's
>> far too wide. However, if you go back and look at why it even *got* to
>> council, it was because you (and others), decided that they weren't
>> going to give any regard to the requests of some of their fellow devs
>> about ChangeLogging removals.
>
> how is this relevant at all ?  i dont find value in these entries, other
> people do.  my attitude towards how worthless they are has 0 bearing on the
> policy towards creating it.

Plenty of people have, successfully I though, argued that removal
Changelog entries _are_ useful and have cited relevant situations.

Make a case about how the current policy is stupid in that it requires
changelog entries for trivial whitespace changes or for documenting
removals of packages even when it means the changelog is deleted as
well, but for god sake, stop the nonsense about documenting version
removals being useless.

Matt