Hi,
I have noticed there are still modules that don’t ship a changelog in
their tarballs, and their number has been growing ever since the
migration to git.
There should be no need to remind you that the GPL mandates a changelog
or something similar to be present in all source distributions.
It
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
*if*, on the other hand, you want a ChangeLog because it makes your life
as a packager easier (for some unknown reason) then you should probably
ask for a Gnome Goal to add the autogeneration of the ChangeLog from the
Git
Le dimanche 03 octobre 2010 à 10:48 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit :
then the section is referring to the licensee, i.e. people
redistributing the program under the terms of the license, not the
original authors of the program itself; in this case, the Debian
developer applying distribution
Hi!
Anyway, as you said, I think it would be good to add autotools stuff for
this, and have all modules ship with their git changelog, since it can
be useful to distributors and users.
Why is it useful? It's duplication of information (in a strange format)
that is available through git and
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 12:58 +0200, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
Le dimanche 03 octobre 2010 à 10:48 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit :
then the section is referring to the licensee, i.e. people
redistributing the program under the terms of the license, not the
original authors of the program
Le dimanche 03 octobre 2010 à 10:48 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit :
if you're referring to the 2.a clause in the GPLv2, i.e.:
[snip]
then the section is referring to the licensee, i.e. people
redistributing the program under the terms of the license, not the
original authors of the program
Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com a écrit:
*if*, on the other hand, you want a ChangeLog because it makes your life
as a packager easier (for some unknown reason) then you should probably
ask for a Gnome Goal to add the autogeneration of the ChangeLog from the
Git commit log to every GNOME
On Sun, 2010-10-03 at 13:33 +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Le dimanche 03 octobre 2010 à 10:48 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit :
if you're referring to the 2.a clause in the GPLv2, i.e.:
[snip]
then the section is referring to the licensee, i.e. people
redistributing the program under the
