Ben Finney wrote: > "Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <jackyf.devel+AEA-gmail.com> writes: [snip] >>>> But how can users know about this changes in Debian packages? >>> By the existing README.Debian and NEWS.Debian conventions (for >>> persistent and version-sensitive changes, respectively). >>> >> Have non-Debian users access to this files? > > Sure. One doesn't need to use Debian to get a Debian source package +IBQ- > or even a Debian binary package. Both types contain these files. >> Have Debian users access to these files when packages are not >> installed on system? > > Only by getting the package and unpacking it (as I'm sure you know, > the package can be unpacked and inspected without installing it). Both these methods require: 1) knowledge about where to look for Debian changes (Debian users should know about README.Debian, but non-Debian?) 2) downloading some stuff Ok for geeks and developers, but too expensive for others, imho. > Are you proposing that, in addition to the changelog and the > README.Debian and the NEWS.Debian and the package control files, that > there should be +ACo-yet another+ACo- place where the package maintainer is > expected to duplicate information on what they've done to the package? README.Debian contains notes about important changes that made in Debian's variant of package for a long time of package' lifecycle. NEWS.Debian is especially good for upgrading. Changelog is for developers and geek users as it contains developer stuff. Patches is almost purely developer stuff. In my view, all these files do not cover "actual user-oriented important divergences from upstream". Only in my view. I understand that this proposed info will interfere with above mentioned one in Debian documentation files and will require some additional time to maintain. -- Eugene V. Lyubimkin aka JackYF
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature