On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 02:41:53PM +0100, Mathieu Roy wrote: > Branden Robinson <branden@debian.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2004 at 03:48:54PM +0100, Martin Albert wrote: > >> On Sunday 21 March 2004 02:27, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> > maintainer(s) can lose these changelog messages easily and then > >> > >> I don't think that should happen. Rewriting history is considered bad > >> practice. Add changes on top that make better packages. > > > > It's not rewriting history if the changelog didn't document history in > > the first place. > > And on what basis do you decide what is history and what is not? That which changed in the package (outside the changelog itself) is history for the purpose of a changelog. Everything else isn't. > These malformed changelog entries are definitely a part of the > package's history. All they need to say is "Orphaned package.". The rest is just confusing noise. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | Ab abusu ad usum non valet branden@debian.org | consequentia. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature