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 1RJ8st-0007pg-0m for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:11:31 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ADABF21C278; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:11:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5582A21C264; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:10:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mattst88) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 338211B4019; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:10:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vws19 with SMTP id 19so2743916vws.40 for ; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:10:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.69.52 with SMTP id b20mr177879vdu.85.1319656206218; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:10:06 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.52.187.38 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Oct 2011 12:09:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1319652305.5300.7.camel@belkin4> References: <20111026163025.GA843@gentoo.org> <20111026183551.32cfffe8@pomiocik.lan> <20111026163724.GB843@gentoo.org> <20111026184927.255ed3bb@pomiocik.lan> <20111026170607.GF843@gentoo.org> <20111026191124.411c1f00@pomiocik.lan> <20111026171554.GG843@gentoo.org> <1319652305.5300.7.camel@belkin4> From: Matt Turner Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 15:09:46 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: c72f44672abce4a2969a257aa554f9d9 On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El mi=C3=A9, 26-10-2011 a las 19:15 +0200, Fabian Groffen escribi=C3=B3: >> On 26-10-2011 19:11:24 +0200, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200 >> > Fabian Groffen 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: > =C2=A026 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos -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) I think that makes a lot of sense. Matt