Re: mdadm 2.4.1-1 ready for tests
On Thu, 18 May 2006, martin f krafft wrote:
> Also, what you are saying leads me to believe that you would want me
> to document *all* important changes, whether respective Debian bugs
> existed or not. NEWS.Debian is clearly a better method for such
Many important changes do not modify the intended behaviour of the program,
nor do they require external action of the user for things ot keep working
right. Those I never list on NEWS.Debian in my packages.
OTOH, if it *does* change behaviour in an important way (whatever I deem to
be important, or whatever I find out others considered important through
feedback), or if it requires the user to take some action to keep things
working smoothly, it is NEWS.Debian material IMHO.
> announcements, but you *should* try to keep the stuff there down to
> a minimum, IMHO.
> > but adding the main points there is *very* appreciated by many of
> > us.
> This argument stands. I'll consider it.
Thanks. As you said, this is *not* a big deal, it is exactly that, just a
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot