[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: (non-)upstream changelog

Il giorno gio, 05/11/2009 alle 23.20 +0100, Sandro Tosi ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 2009/11/5 Pietro Battiston <toobaz@email.it>:
> > Hello,
> > the developers of an app I'm packaging, denemo (www.denemo.org) do not
> > use (it is there, but not updated since months) the file ChangeLog.
> >
> > However, they do keep a list of changes, which they published, for the
> > last release, in their site and on the mailing list, and which content
> > would be the perfect content for filling a changelog. [0]
> >
> > Do you suggest me to:
> > - patch the changelog/introduce a new one, and then install it, or
> > - in debian/changelog, after "New upstream release", list all of those
> > changes?
> The only sane solution is to bother upstream until the update the
> changelog distributed with the tarball.
> > I tend to see the second option as cleaner, but I don't know if ~20
> > lines of changelog entry for a new upstream release would be considered
> > too verbose.
> please don't. That is the *debian* changelog.
> > P.S: yes, I may ask them to change their policy... for the next release.
> not 'may', just do it.

OK, done

> > P.P.S: I'm taking care of this package since few months... under
> > previous maintainer, the upstream ChangeLog was still updated
> That's nicer, but I don't think it's worth a hunk in diff.gz (either
> as direct change or patch) for this.

In the end, you're suggesting to ship (this version of) the package with
no hint at all about what changed across versions?!


Reply to: