Am 23.06.2011 17:04, schrieb Dan McGee: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Sven-Hendrik Haase <[email protected]> > 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? > > 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 second Dan's opinion here. => NAK We use changelogs quite extensively, and all should keep in mind that pacman -Qc PACKAGENAME will help any user that doesn't need to know where your PKGBUILD tree is managed / tracked / whatever... I would suggest that makepkg should be extended to have a way to add the output of a command (e.g. "svn log") as changelog to a package... That would make the life easier for any maintainer and would solve the problem even for the lazy arch package maintainers... :-P Thanks, Marc
