Am 23.06.2011 17:04, schrieb Dan McGee:
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh@lutzhaase.com> wrote:
On 06/23/2011 04:19 PM, Thomas Dziedzic wrote:
I would like to bring up a point which has been annoying me for a while and I would like to get it out there.
I will argue that the changelog feature is unnecessary in pacman/PKGBUILDs.
1.) It's a feature rarely used by anyone, e.g. there are changelogs which exist which haven't been updated in years which I encounter and remove right away.
2.)Svn log usually serves the same purpose, and I can not think of any benefits changelogs provide over svn log.
3.)I can not think of one package I have encountered that included a useful changelog.
Some ways to go about removing it are: declare deprecated -> remove after some time or just remove changelog support right away The last option might be viable given its small audience.
+1 for all the reasons you stated.
I favor removing changelog right away.
So confused. Should we remove deltas too? And support for bz2/xz packages and databases?
Why on earth would we remove a feature that someone might use, even if Arch is not making extensive use of it? This is incredibly shortsighted.
I second Dan's opinion here. => NAK We use changelogs quite extensively, and all should keep in mind that pacman -Qc PACKAGENAME will help any user that doesn't need to know where your PKGBUILD tree is managed / tracked / whatever... I would suggest that makepkg should be extended to have a way to add the output of a command (e.g. "svn log") as changelog to a package... That would make the life easier for any maintainer and would solve the problem even for the lazy arch package maintainers... :-P Thanks, Marc