On Tue, Feb 21, 2006 at 08:42:02PM -0500, Greg Meyer wrote: > 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?
For the curious, the reason most of them are simply marked "upgpkg: $pkgname-$pkgver-$pkgrel" is because that is the default commit message used by devtools. -S
pgpCmqGxsH1QP.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
