Josip Rodin <joy@cibalia.gkvk.hr> writes: > On Sun, Jul 08, 2001 at 01:37:05PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote: > > There have even been some uploads with no other purpose than to > > close some bugs, [...] This makes a nice out-of-context quote, Colin! > Hear, hear. The real reason why a bug was closed should always be listed. > In detail if necessary, there's no byte limit on changelogs! I fully agree. A changelog should be understandable without going to the BTS, or (horrors!) having to diff the two versions. > I've done differently rarely, recently with a new XMMS which closed 17 bugs > and I had to finish the changelog within hours :) Not going into much detail for upstream changes is ok, IMHO. There should be an upstream changelog, after all. > The upstream author gave me a list, and he is reliable. Since he keeps an eye on our BTS, why not try to persuade him to put the bug# into his changelog, when he thinks a bug is down? That's probably not significantly more work, and would be optimal for Debian users. -- Robbe
Attachment:
signature.ng
Description: PGP signature