On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, 23:18 Santiago Vila, <sanv...@debian.org> wrote:
> El 18/4/24 a las 22:17, Richard Lewis escribió: > >>> '^[a-zA-Z0-9_][a-zA-Z0-9._-]*\.sh$' > >> > >> Hi. I confirm that this is appropriate for what we distribute: > > > > What about local scripts added by users (which this change might > > prevent loading): perhaps a NEWS.Debian entry would suffice? > > Are there any guidelines about when NEWS.Debian should be used > and when the Release Notes? > > (I'd like to avoid spamming the users with non-important information) > i may well be missing something, but I think: - policy is entirely silent on this (i may well be missing something here!) - devref has: < https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/best-pkging-practices.en.html#supplementing-changelogs-with-news-debian-files > which says "This is the preferred means to let the user know about significant changes in a package." and "Only update them if you have something particularly newsworthy that user should know about." - release notes has very little - https://salsa.debian.org/ddp-team/release-notes/-/blob/master/README.md which says "The Release Notes contain important information for people updating from the previous version of Debian, particularly for less experienced users." fwiw my understanding is that release-notes should be used less often, than NEWS.Debian because - it only covers stable-to-stable upgrades (i doubt many unstable users read it at all - certainly at the moment i don't think there is any single post-bookworm content) - release-notes will only be ready once, on stable upgrades, whereas NEWS.Debian might be more useful for people tracking unstable (personally i would hope everything in release-notes is covered in NEWS.Debian for that reason!) - release-notes is meant to be understandable by less experienced non-technical "users" (all documentation should of course aim for that, in theory) - NEWS.Debian is "opt-in": if you install apt-listchanges you'll see NEWS.Debian, but that package isnt installed by the default. Even fewer users will read the changelog (although apt-listchanges can email that as well) (i dont think people would take a radically different view, but i may be mistaken!) i think in both cases, what gets included is a matter of judgement --- my personal view is that this change is not quite important enough (in terms of likely impact) for release-notes, but i would also happily help draft text for release-notes or drop the issue entirely: i dont feel strongly about this, i just happened to spot this bug
