Re: Changelog issues with (among others) tkdiff 1:3.08-4
On Sun, 01 Jun 2003 19:13:29 +1000, Herbert Xu <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> Brian Nelson <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Adrian Bridgett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> Changes: tkdiff (1:3.08-4) unstable; urgency=low .
>>> * lintian fixes
>> Issues that lintian reports are, in most cases, bugs. Bugs that
>> you have fixed should be explicitly described in the changelog.
>> After all, lintian reports many different types of bugs; how can we
>> guess which bug is the one that applies in this case?
> He could've choosen to not list that in the changelog at all. Then
> you wouldn't even know about it.
Yes. Anyone can chose to be a shitty maintainer. Package
quality degradation may not be obvious for a while.
> Seriously, please find something more productive to do than making
> these never-ending complaints about changelog entries. It might've
> been fun for the first few times but it's getting really boring now.
On the contrary, if increasing the quality of changelog
entries, and documenting changes properly falls under boring, you
need to evaluate your stance on quality control.
One good turn usually gets most of the blanket.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C