Mail Archives: cygwin/2005/09/08/09:22:38
On Thu, 8 Sep 2005, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Sep 8 18:12, Luke Kendall wrote:
> > CVS: ------- Is this change worth noting in the package changelog? -----
> > CVS:
> > CVS: Enter Log. Lines beginning with `CVS:' are removed automatically
> > CVS:
> > CVS: Modified Files:
> > CVS: some-filename
> > CVS: ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Do you see what I mean?
>
> There's a misconception here. You're assuming that the net distro
> packages are all located in some CVS repository which is under our
> control, which it isn't.
> [snip]
In addition to this, most of the time it's the other way around -- first a
ChangeLog entry is written, then it's used as the CVS commit message.
Plus, I know very few people that actually type those messages as they
check stuff in -- I, for one, always use the command line parameters, so I
never see the template.
> The information you want to see is most of the time available in
> a NEWS or ChangeLog file in the source repository. If the Cygwin
> package maintainer thought of it, then you might find these files
> somewhere in /usr/share/doc/$package/ but that's not generally
> the case.
The generic-build-script usually attempts to collect those files and put
them in the right place. If there are some files that it misses, well,
<http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PTC>.
> It also might be a good idea to enforce "better" announcements with
> more information than just "Updated", which is something I'm trying
> for myself. However, you know how enforcements work. First, they
> are contrary to human nature (so called "laziness"). Then the
> maintainer's point of view what's interesting or important might be
> quite different from the user's point of view, leading to lots of
> information you're absolutely not interested in. At last, enforcements
> don't work by themselves. http://cygwin.com/acronymns/#SHTDI
Exactly.
> Bottom line, while my personal laziness demands that people tell me all
> about their stuff so I don't have to look myself, I think that it's
> actually my own responsibility to keep informed about the features of
> the software I use. Thorough and easily consumptiable information
> in announcements is a courtesy of the maintainer, and it doesn't get
> me out of my responsibility to keep informed myself.
While I agree with everything Corinnal posted above, there was an
alternative approach: for a bit, someone was following announcements that
forgot to describe the package with a description message. If this is
done properly (i.e., for all affected package announcements, with
threading kept, and all of the missing information and "cool new features"
concentrated in one message), this could be a useful service to the Cygwin
community and a gentle reminder to the package maintainers. But, as
Corinna said, <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#SHTDI> (and it's a thankless,
flame-prone job that requires real dedication :-D).
Igor
--
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
|\ _,,,---,,_ pechtcha AT cs DOT nyu DOT edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ igor AT watson DOT ibm DOT com
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
If there's any real truth it's that the entire multidimensional infinity
of the Universe is almost certainly being run by a bunch of maniacs. /DA
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -