[pacman-dev] Discussion about deprecating/removing the changelog feature from pacman.

[Thomas Dziedzic]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Thomas Dziedzic <gostrc at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase <sh at 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?
> >>
> >
> > Deltas have a future use, I would be crazy to suggest that we should
> remove
> > them. There is nothing that could replace deltas easily.
> > I would be even more crazy to suggest removing xz pkg support as we are
> > currently using this format in all the packages. There is especially
> nothing
> > that could replace this.
> >
> >
> >> 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 just want to bring this up because there is an alternative method (svn
> > log) which I think works just as well if not better.
>
> Sure, but this is Arch specific. I obviously had no intention of
> removing delta, xz, etc. but my point is the changelog functionality
> is exactly the same- it is a tool to use, but not something to be
> removed if it is not used.
>
> -Dan
>
>
Fair argument, but I have already made my argument that it isn't the same
since changelog has an alternative method unlike the other features.
If you hold your statement, then we can at least agree to disagree.

@Kerrick
If this was a simple matter of making the man page smaller, I would have
probably rewritten some sentences and submitted a patch :P
It's a matter of deprecating features that have better methods or are at the
point of being more annoying then useful (ime).