Re: Multiple upstream changelog files
Am Dienstag, den 30.01.2007, 00:35 -0500 schrieb Justin Pryzby:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:44:00AM +0100, Daniel Leidert wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, den 30.01.2007, 01:54 +0100 schrieb Magnus Holmgren:
> > > I better ask this once and for all...
> > >
> > > I maintain a package where the upstream author has two changelog files: A
> > > brief one called Changes, summarizing the changes, and a detailed one called
> > > ChangeLog, which contains a detailed list of changes made to the various
> > > source files. Which one should be installed as "changelog"?
> > >
> > > I'd guess the brief one, since it's the one users are most likely to want to
> > > read first, but on the other hand it looks a bit confusing with both a
> > > changelog(.gz) and a ChangeLog.
> > I agree to this. I normally prefer to install the NEWS file (release
> > changelog) instead of the ChangeLog file (file changelog). It's shorter
> > and easier to understand. File changelogs are often very detailed and
> > important information is hard to find.
> I would prefer to have both available to me, with the detailed changelog as
> changelog.gz and the summary as NEWS.gz. dh_installchangelogs handles this
> with ./debian/package.NEWS.
Dumb question: How this? debian/package.NEWS is (from man-page reading)
just a different form for debian/NEWS and this file is installed
as /usr/share/doc/package/NEWS.Debian.gz, which is not intended to
contain the upstream NEWS file. Am I wrong?