On 09/11/2010 10:31 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote: > On 11-09-2010 21:29:22 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >>>>>>> On Sat, 11 Sep 2010, Petteri Räty wrote: >> >>>> Update EAPI. Fix dependencies. >> >>> This message does not tell why the EPREFIX stuff was removed. >> >> Come on. EAPI was updated to 3, and removal of the EPREFIX assignments >> are part of that. > > I thought the same initially, then I realised that Petteri probably > meant that "Update EAPI" doesn't really say anything. Mention EAPI=3 > in the commit message and it is all clear. (From the ChangeLog > perspective an EAPI bump/update shouldn't really matter much as it > shouldn't change anything for the user.) >
I was thinking it could have been something along the lines of "Fix dependencies and cleanup the ebuild by making use of EAPI 3." For me the connection between EAPI 3 and the prefix was not obvious so probably not for everyone else either. I agree with Fabian that ChangeLog should not be verbose about things that don't affect users in any way. For that kind of stuff you can be verbose in the CVS commit message. Regards, Petteri Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
