[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFS: xpn



Hi,

> Hmm. Well i have no link, cause i don't know that there has been any
> different opinions on this. It might not be a technical problem, but as
> the changelog is part of what the users _can_ see it might not be a good
> idea to publish something thats not available to anyone, but the
> developer. To say: If there is something you don't wanna show the user,
> why would you want to tell him, that it exists? Just to nag him?

Why should I try to hide the normal course of development?  I don't see
the necessity to create extra loops (reformatting the changelog after
each intermediate package creation that is not uploaded) for me to jump
through. Have a look at this[1] thread, for example... that's not the
full discussion I remember, but I can't find it at the moment.

> Apart from this: I don't think that Michael did this by intension.

Hm, hard to tell. Oh, and for more real-world examples...

] jcn@hejre:/usr/share/doc$ find . -name changelog.Debian.gz | xargs zgrep -i UNRELEASED


Regards,

Jan

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2007/07/msg00238.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: