Re: Horrific new levels of changelog abuse
On Sat, Sep 20, 2003 at 12:53:40AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > > There have been many instances where a changelog entry says "fixed by
> > > > the upstream" and I could not for the life of me find out how in their
> > > > changelog.
> > > Therein lies the problem.
> > > As far as the BTS is concerned, it is irrelevant how a bug is fixed.
> > And as far as most Debian users are concerned, it is not.
> > The BTS exists to handle bugs because of the users, not the other way around.
> > What exactly is so problematic about respecting users' wishes in this regard?
>
> This isn't anything to do with "users' wishes", or the mechanics of
> anything, it's just basic engineering practice of noting down what
> important changes have been made.
> Allowing you to close bugs by *annotating* your changelog is a nice
> feature, but it doesn't change the point of the changelog.
Once that feature is used, the changelog is no longer just changelog but
also the contents of the message that closes the bug. If people want to
avoid that, they shouldn't use the feature.
--
2. That which causes joy or happiness.
Reply to: