Re: trimming changelogs
Adam Borowski writes:
> Of files named changelog.*, top offenders are:
[ Trimmed list to duplicates ]
> 223009 ncurses-bin:changelog.gz
> 223009 ncurses-base:changelog.gz
> 223009 libtinfo6:changelog.gz
> 210621 libc6:changelog.Debian.gz
> 210621 libc-bin:changelog.Debian.gz
> 145889 libapt-pkg6.0:changelog.gz
> 145889 apt:changelog.gz
> 145271 passwd:changelog.gz
> 145271 login:changelog.gz
> 93638 libudev1:changelog.Debian.gz
> 93638 libsystemd0:changelog.Debian.gz
> 63670 logsave:changelog.Debian.gz
> 63670 libss2:changelog.Debian.gz
> 63670 libext2fs2:changelog.Debian.gz
> 63670 libcom-err2:changelog.Debian.gz
> 63670 e2fsprogs:changelog.Debian.gz
We should probably also not ship the same changelog in multiple
packages, especially when one depends on the other.
> Seems like a tempting area to trim...
I agree it would be fine to trim changelogs a bit; no real opinion on
how much to keep (maybe at most three years or so?). We certainly don't
need 20 years of changelog in any binary package by default in my
> On the other hand, changelogs are valuable. Unlike some folks on IRC
> I wouldn't want to tightly trim all packages. Unlike minbase or
> prio:important, your average 5GB install doesn't care about a few megs
> here and there. Thus: do we want to trim manually or globally?
Special cases for packages are annoying, so I would just apply the same
policy for all packages (by default).