On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 08:30:50PM -0600, John Galt wrote:
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Richard Braakman wrote:
It also doesn't require more than the name and the date, and it doesn't
forbid you from removing the notices for previous changes. So your
Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] cum veritate scripsit:
Who cares about changelogs if there is no requirement that they tell
the truth?
I've always thought changelogs were necessary because GPL wants this :
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
of it, thus
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 04:42:15PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
It says the modified files. Keeping a separate ChangeLog does
not meet this requirement; the
On 15-May-01, 13:35 (CDT), Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Who cares about changelogs if there is no requirement that they tell
the truth?
Because *most* developers will have correct (and possibly even useful)
changelogs most of the time. If a few don't, then people will complain,
and
On Wed, 16 May 2001, Richard Braakman wrote:
On Wed, May 16, 2001 at 04:42:15PM +0900, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
a) You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices
stating that you changed the files and the date of any change.
It says the modified files. Keeping a separate
On May 14, Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can always keep the old changelogs in the source package only.
We have archive.debian.org for the old things. As long as the entries
are archived in a released distribution I think it's fine to snip them
and save the disk space of all our
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:30:08AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On May 14, Julian Gilbey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can always keep the old changelogs in the source package only.
We have archive.debian.org for the old things. As long as the entries
are archived in a released distribution I
Who cares about changelogs if there is no requirement that they tell
the truth?
Hi,
I had some time ago a discussion with Paul Slootman in #85936 about the
removal of old changelog entries. He did remove at one point all changelog
entries except the latest on (and Raphael Bossek did recently the same in
some of his packages). Paul simply closed #85936 with the comment
--
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
It seems he's right and I can't find a place in the policy that forbids
the deletion of old changelog entries or did I miss something?
It also doesn't allow it. Common behaviour seems to be to move the old
changelog entries in a seperate file.
Old changelog
Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I had some time ago a discussion with Paul Slootman in #85936 about the
removal of old changelog entries. He did remove at one point all changelog
entries except the latest on (and Raphael Bossek did recently the same in
some of his packages). Paul simply
Adrian Bunk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had some time ago a discussion with Paul Slootman in #85936 about the
removal of old changelog entries. He did remove at one point all changelog
entries except the latest on (and Raphael Bossek did recently the same in
some of his packages). Paul simply
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 08:21:07PM +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Adrian Bunk wrote:
It seems he's right and I can't find a place in the policy that forbids
the deletion of old changelog entries or did I miss something?
It also doesn't allow it. Common behaviour seems to be to
On Mon, 14 May 2001, Colin Watson wrote:
...
Also see #82790, whose maintainer apparently never keeps more than one
changelog entry. Unfortunately, unless someone has the old changelog
entries and can NMU, not a lot can be done about it.
After reading Thomas' answer it seems to be the correct
14 matches
Mail list logo
