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

Re: lilo: bad changelog entry violates Social Contract

I demand that Peter Palfrader may or may not have written...

> On Tue, 06 Aug 2002, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 05, 2002 at 12:06:12AM +0000, Lazarus Long wrote:
>>> They are meant to *document* *what has CHANGED* so that users of
>>> apt-listchanges can make appropriate decisions as to whether or not to
>>> allow an upgrade to continue, or to cancel it.
>> The changelog told you that it's a new upstream version and that it closes
>> a particular bug.

> I want to know what the bug was without having to go online.

Hmm. Using apt-get => probably online already (install from CD/DVD aside),

> |  * New upstream version (closes: #7321232).
> |    - Closes: #123456: ignores config file
> |    - Closes: #987732: evil default colors in menu
> |  * Fix Build-Depends (closes: #99833).

> Is that too much to ask?

I wouldn't expect so. But it occurs to me that those 'closes' items could be
converted into links, should apt-listchanges be configured to use $BROWSER to
display the changelogs.

| Darren Salt       | nr. Ashington, | linux (or ds) at
| Linux PC, Risc PC | Northumberland | youmustbejoking
| No Wodniws here   | Toon Army      | demon co uk
|   Retrocomputing: a PC card in a Risc PC

cricket: n. Rain-making ritual.

Reply to: