Re: Changelog entries best practices?
On Tue, Apr 26, 2005 at 07:57:39PM -0400, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Hello,
>
> 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
>
> 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.
Hi,
clearly this is an issue. However it is really only the tip
of an iceberg which is that the kernel-image packages are
detached from the sources they are built from. I believe
that the real solution to this is to merge the kernel-image
and kernel-sources packages together, as has been done
for the kernel in ubuntu. There are plans to adopt
this for Debian (post-sarge) and this should appear
in unstable in the not to distant future.
As for providing links to the changelogs as a stop-gap measure
for sarge, its a bit tedious as there isn't a good way
to have these incorporated in the debian archive - and putting
them anywhere else would liukely end up in broken links.
We could just include the entire kernel-source changelog entry in
the kernel-image changelog, but in practice people would forget -
we have enough trouble getting a consistend dependancies for
kernel-images for different architectures. Again, single source
will solve this. So relly the best thing to do would be to try
and get a slightly better annotation, e.g Built against
kernel-srouce-2.6.8_2.6.8-13, please see its change log
for further details.
--
Horms
Reply to: