When rebuilding an Arch package for the official repository, is there any standard that should be followed with respect to the cvs commit message?
The reason I ask this, and it is one of the more frustrating things for me about Arch Linux, is that it is often very hard to tell what the reason for the new package is, A case in point (and I randomly selected one, I am not criticizing a particular packager) is the newest vorbis-tools. The cvs commit message displayed says "upgpkg: vorbis-tools 1.1.1-2" however, if you diff the spec file against the prior version, you can see that the real change was to rebuild the package without speex support. So at first glance it looks like a simple package upgrade, but in reality it is a rebuild that removes some functionality. I find this sort of thing to be true about a great many packages. I think it would be really cool if the commit messages actually had some meaning, and there was an rss feed or perhaps have them included on the package summary below the Last Updated field. This way it is easy to see why there is a new package. This is obviously less important when there is a new version of a software, but in the present case, wouldn't it be interesting to know why the package is rebuilt without speex? -- Greg _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
