Re: Bug#23683: lintian: too strict about changelog file compression

[Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> 	Technically, you are correct; if we look solely to the letter
>  of the policy. However, if there was a rationale to asking changelogs
>  to be compressed, surely that applies even more so to older
>  changelog-like files?  (Older changelog files are even less likely to
>  be of interest).

Here's my understanding of why we always compress debian and upstream
changelogs:

1. We expect that even if they are too small (<4 k or whatever) to make
   compression worthwhile now, they will grow over time.
2. We want these files to always have the same name, so it's easy to find
   them.

Seems to me that secondary upstream changelogs already fail point #2. Even
if point #1 is valid for them, there should be no problem with compressing
them only if they get too big, becuase name consitency is not an issue.

-- 
see shy jo


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org