Hello,
what is our position on the length of the %changelog section in our
rpms? Now that we've released Spacewalk 1.0 and most core Spacewalk
packages are in version 1.0, might it make sense to trim any changelog
items for versions pre 1.0? Or maybe any changelog items older than
say two years?
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 16:59:29 Jan Pazdziora wrote:
> Hello,
>
> what is our position on the length of the %changelog section in our
> rpms? Now that we've released Spacewalk 1.0 and most core Spacewalk
> packages are in version 1.0, might it make sense to trim any changelog
> items for versions
Milan Zazrivec wrote:
On Tuesday 01 June 2010 16:59:29 Jan Pazdziora wrote:
Hello,
what is our position on the length of the %changelog section in our
rpms? Now that we've released Spacewalk 1.0 and most core Spacewalk
packages are in version 1.0, might it make sense to trim any changelog
items
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Cliff wrote:
> I'd be interested in knowing if there is any general guideline from Fedora
> for package maintainers that we would need to adhere too?
I'm pretty sure the fedora guidelines only state to add a new entry
with every new release but does never say if or
On Tue, Jun 01, 2010 at 08:36:05PM +0200, Sandro red Mathys wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Cliff wrote:
> > I'd be interested in knowing if there is any general guideline from Fedora
> > for package maintainers that we would need to adhere too?
>
> I'm pretty sure the fedora guidelines
On 06/01/2010 04:59 PM, Jan Pazdziora wrote:
Hello,
what is our position on the length of the %changelog section in our
rpms? Now that we've released Spacewalk 1.0 and most core Spacewalk
packages are in version 1.0, might it make sense to trim any changelog
items for versions pre 1.0? Or maybe
