Re: Bug#190302: Misusage of changelog!
On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 01:36:15PM -0500, Luca - De Whiskey's - De Vitis wrote:
> On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 01:13:06PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
> > A changelog entry which says only Closes: #<bug> is worthless; it is the
> > same as leaving the changelog empty and closing the bug by hand.
> We are not speaking of a generic line with a "Closes: #1..."; we are
> speaking of one of the most common chages: new upstream source close some
> I don't realy see the point in bothering the maintainer in further
> explanation of what happened: it is obvious and anyone has _all_ the
> information he may need to find it for himself.
It is _not_ obvious, and "closes: #..." gives no clue to someone reading the
changelog what might have been changed. Internet access, knowledge of
debbugs, etc. are not prerequisites for being able to make use of a
> Should it ever happen to me, i would exactly think: I do spend my time
> maintaing, fixing upgrading the software, keep in touch with the upstream,
> forwarding report or any othern thing needed, so how do you now dare to
> bother me because i did not write a verbose, futil and redundant changelog
I do not understand how anyone can complain so much over something which
takes so little effort, and yet adds value to the package for users, other
developers and future maintainers.
> How could you tell me that writing what you wanted, would have taken me
> only few minutes? Are you teling me that what i do isn't enough? Your
> comment is only a waste of time for me that read the mail and for you who
> wrote it: you would surely have spent less time seeing it for yourself
> then reopening that bugs.
Clearly you have me confused with someone else. I didn't reopen any bugs.
> Do you know what? I've more important things to do than spending my time
> reading the last, never ending thread, about the most stupid issue in the
> open source world.
For instance, documenting your changes.