Re: Changelog entries best practices?
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Today a (minor) bug 306382 was opened (and promptly closed :-) against the
> kernel-image package, which does not contain nothing in changelog except
> "Build against 2.6.11-3". While this is perfectly fine, it is easy to
> understand frustration of people, who are not that proficient in the
> kernel build procedure. They don't have an obvious place to look for a
> changelog entry, so I propose to include a standard phrase in every
> kernel-image changelog, along the lines of
> * Built against kernel-source 2.x.y-z. For a complete list of changes
> consult the kernel-source changelog, which may be accessed online
> at http://changelogs.debian.net/kernel-source-2.x.y
that's a nice idea,
but we should not burden the uploaders to much with such formal
boilerplates. i prefer to put a similar phrase in the Readme.Debian
for any curious, please feel free to add it there.
> Myself, I have bumped into another changelog-related "problem". Currently
> there seems to be no convention on where the new changelog entries should
> be added upon modification of kernel-source in svn. It looks like some
> people append them to the end of existing changelog entry, while others
> (like me) prefer to insert it in the beginning :-). As the choice is
> pretty arbitrary, I propose to insert the new entries in the beginning of
> the file, to avoid duplications.
> If there are no serious objections, I suggest to adopt these proposals and
> introduce appropriate changes into the trunk/README file.
that doesn't match current practise.
an changelog entry reads from the top to the down.
so it's makes sense to add it that way.