On Wed, 2008-11-12 at 08:39 +0100, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Guido Günther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008.11.08.1419 +0100]:
> > Does this look like a worthwhile extension to the current changelog
> > format? For me it makes reviewing changes a lot easier.
> I think this is very important to have, but why put them at the
> front? Changelogs are for consumption by humans and machines, and
> humans have it easier if they can just start reading on the left
> side and get the information they want. Machines don't really care
> very much.
> So, similar to how we close bugs, how about
>   * fixed segfault during daemon startup (Closes: #7005180) [fed3f3d]
> instead?

You mean 


don't you?

I don't think we need a VCS identifier there. I don't see why anyone
would specify a bzr revision id in a git package.

How would this differ from using annotate on the changelog? Do some
people write the changelog at the end?



vcs-pkg-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to