On Tue, May 27, 2003 at 07:41:34PM -0700, Brian Nelson wrote: > Steve Langasek <vorlon@netexpress.net> writes: > > you're getting upset about bug closings that absolutely *do* include a > > description of what the maintainer changed in order to fix them: > > incorporating a "new upstream release". That this is too succinct for > > some applications does not make it "changelog abuse". > > I'll concede this point, though I still think we should encourage > maintainers to spell out upstream fixes in the changelog. Me too. Matthias Klose's changelog entry for gcc-3.3 1:3.3ds9-1 was a thing of beauty. I wept with joy at its clarity and comprehensiveness. THAT is how to be good to users who find bugs in the compiler suite. I'll probably never be able to come up with something so comprehensive for XFree86. My hat's off to Matthias and the rest of the GCC packaging team. -- G. Branden Robinson | I had thought very carefully about Debian GNU/Linux | comitting hara-kiri over this, but branden@debian.org | I overslept this morning. http://people.debian.org/~branden/ | -- Toshio Yamaguchi
Attachment:
pgpfWXJ1jdIbu.pgp
Description: PGP signature