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

[Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 952 bytes --]

On 26-10-2011 20:05:05 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> 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?

You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why.
That's the idea of the ChangeLog file.

Compare:

old

remove for security bug ...

[this is a placeholder, please ignore]

^

Version bump

Remove superseeded versions

Drop due to dep on <libpng-1.5


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]