Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> >> Good point. Shall we mandate that all bug closures be adequately
> >> documented in the ChangeLog? I would be quite happy with that.
> I do think bug closures be documented in the ChangeLog (I
> shall attempt to do so from now on for every real bug that is closed
> for my packages). I shall not upload for every item in my changelog.
Like so?
debhelper (4.1.48) unstable; urgency=low
* Not adding ld.so.conf parsing code for libraries, if your library is not
in a usual path, use the standard -X option to dh_makeshlibs to skip it.
Closes: #122174
* No, I don't think that adding rm -rf /tmp to postinsts is a good idea.
Closed: #201012
* Reasigned bugs #133949 and #123043 to dh-make, since dh_make is not in
debhelper. When will people learn?
* debhelper won't include a dh_installrootkit until I see more demand for
such a program. Closes: #37337
* I fixed the "debhelper overwrites libc" bug back in 1999, why am I still
getting reports about it? Sheesh. Closed: #393933, #209202, #384821
* Yes, debhelper and debconf do indeed have recursive build-depends. Deal.
Closed: #197602
* In the last release I made a typo, and accidentially closed bug #196343,
not #196344. I've reopened the former bug. Closes: #196344
* Trimmed the last 500k of the changelog; it was 90% of the entire package
size since it recorded every dismissed feature request and dh-make bug
for the past 6 years.
* Fixed a typo in dh_python. Closes: #197679
-- Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> Mon, 16 Jun 2003 16:58:27 -0400
--
see shy jo
Attachment:
pgpKURUxvpMpB.pgp
Description: PGP signature