Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes: > Ben Finney <[email protected]> writes: > > [modifying previous changelog entries] breaks the entirely > > reasonable expectation: that a changelog only ever accumulates > > entries for the latest release, and nothing in earlier releases has > > changed since the last time the recipient read them. > > I think the absolute prohibition takes things a bit too far.
Charles Plessy <[email protected]> writes: > What is that expectation for ? I find it dogmatic written like this. I'm not seeing where what I wrote is an absolute prohibition, nor dogmatic. You both read it that way, though, so I apologise for communicating poorly. To say it more plainly: Modifying previous changelog entries, while not prohibited, does break an implicit user expectation. I think that expectation is reasonable to an extent, and breaking it is costly to the same extent. -- \ “Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so far as | `\ society is free to use the results.” —Richard M. Stallman | _o__) | Ben Finney -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
