On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:15:16PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 11:10:14PM +0200, Carsten Hey wrote: > > > I currently don't see a relevant benefit in this above just using the > > changelog entry, which you need to write anyway. Additional information > > Putting the information in the changelog makes it much harder to find
Yes, putting the information _only_ in the changelog make it much harder to find, but that is not what I did nor what I proposed. As you can see, my patch header is a copy of the changelog entry, so you don't even need to open the changelog file to get all relevant information. I proposed a free text format which should include specified information, whether this is a git like header, a copy of the changelog entry or anything else does not matter as long as it is readable and understandable. If an integration of the information in the patch headers into UDD would be planned which could be used to query patches not applied upstream or similar, I would at least see a benefit in using a standard header format. Regards Carsten -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
