On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 09:52:41AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 10:33:19AM +0100, Martin Pitt wrote: > > Matt Zimmerman [2010-11-08 12:47 +0000]: > > > that this would eliminate 95% of the changelog, but would still attribute > > > recent work. This doesn't address Colin's concern. > > > > I could live with this compromise, but I actually think it would > > create more confusion than it would help. You still need a way to see > > the complete changelog. > > This option has its benefits. The reason I think this is better than > the status quo in natty is that there's going to be a sizeable > population of knowledgeable users who reach for > /usr/share/doc/<package>/changelog.<tab><tab> "what the heck?", and I'd > like to eliminate the "what the heck?" factor. A simple option would be > to cap the size of the changelog we distribute in binary packages to > min(a release cycle, some size limit), and at the end of the changelog, > write: > > For older changelog entries, run 'apt-changelog <package>'.
If we add a note (which I think is a good idea), it would be nice if we could do it without changing the format of the changelog. > That would simultaneously help people feel less disoriented by the > change, and introduce them to apt-changelog (which otherwise they > probably wouldn't know about unless they follow Ubuntu developer > announcements - not all the people who read changelogs are Ubuntu > developers). Agreed. > Also, what I think Matt is trying to do here is to minimise the > disorientation for people familiar with changelogs. Many of those > people will be upgrading. There's some value in easing them in > gradually, rather than just nuking everything in one go. Yes, yes, and yes. > Could somebody do the arithmetic on option A to find out how much space > it would save in comparison to (1) maverick and (2) the natty status > quo? I realise that the answers may be approximate. My 95% figure came from counting the approximate number of changelog entries which would be removed if we stripped maverick this way today. I estimated it by scanning the changelogs on my system for the earliest one with a "maverick" distribution entry in it, and comparing this to the total number of entries in the changelog. This excluded packages which were identical in Debian. -- - mdz -- technical-board mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/technical-board
