also sprach Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.05.17.2210 -0500]: > mdadm is a *critical* part of a system that uses linux software > raid. Anything that helps users understand all the important > changes an update will imply is always uselful.
Of course, but if there weren't any important changes, doesn't it suffice that a bug is just fixed? As in: previously mdadm did that wrongly, and that's fixed. Why should a user care how it was fixed? Also, what you are saying leads me to believe that you would want me to document *all* important changes, whether respective Debian bugs existed or not. NEWS.Debian is clearly a better method for such announcements, but you *should* try to keep the stuff there down to a minimum, IMHO. In any case, I *will* go through the fixed-upstream bugs again to make sure that the fixes do not have implications for users who weren't affected by the bug. > Anything that helps a developer easily track down what *exacly* > caused a bug to be closed can be very useful, too. I would expect a developer to know to turn to the upstream changelog for such information. Apart, the Debian changelog would be hopelessly long if I had to specify "what *exactly* caused a bug to be closed." > but adding the main points there is *very* appreciated by many of > us. This argument stands. I'll consider it. also sprach Stefano Zacchiroli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.05.17.2217 -0500]: > I see debian work as tailoring upstream one so that it best fits > our users. Selecting the appropriate information from the upstream > changelog that describe how bugs reported in our BTS got closed is > part of such tailoring. Yes, but see above. A bug that existed previously which is now fixed is in and of itself appropriate information: the problem now does not exist anymore. > Beside that and more practical: why documenting "closes:" in > debian/changelog if the users have no way to understand them? If > it is only for automatically closing bugs with the upload there is > something wrong with the usage of the instrument. Is there? I am telling the user that his/her bugs were closed by upstream, or have been "obsoleted" by the new release. So as you can see, I disagree. However, I do understand that mdadm is kind of critical, so I will reconsider and might change the changelog when I upload to unstable. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' : proud Debian developer and author: http://debiansystem.info `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system http://kirch.net/unix-nt/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature (GPG/PGP)
