On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 11:26 AM, James <wirel...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > I agree with this. But since the Changlog data was a fundamental part > of Gentoo, for a very long time, and the devs wisely chose to upgrade > to git, I would think that this functionality would be provided > via git, at least by some hacks or detailed example.
See my email, and the follow-up with the repos.conf for fetching from git. I'm sure the docs will continue to evolve, and changelogs may be re-introduced in rsync. > In the meantime WE, the gentoo users should > not be required to study git and roll our own solution, one at a time from > previously well defined functionality, imho. Besides Git is > quite a beast:: how long from inception to completion did the gentoo git > migration take? years? a decade? If you give it a few months I'm sure everything will settle out. We've taken WAY too long to complete the git migration, and most of the delay was in the interest of avoiding impacting users with change. We basically ended up drawing a line in the sand and saying that we knew there would be little issues like this that annoy some people to no end, and we'll just deal with that. Otherwise it would have been another 5 years before we end up cancelling the git migration and started talking about whatever is replacing git. > But that's exactly the point; for Changelogs and such info, there > should at least be a news item or dev-blog post on automating such > things. Per packages solutions miss the point of convenience of Changelogs. Feel free to contribute a news item or blog post. :) And nobody is proposing any per-package solutions. Git covers the entire tree and we've standardized the commit messages/etc. > Enhanced data beyond changelogs? Sure, but that caveat should not be > a blocker to what was available. ymmv. Sure, and those old-format changelogs will probably exist again some day. If more people find them useful, they're more likely to get re-created. -- Rich
