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 for versions pre 1.0? Or maybe any changelog items older than
say two years?
One of the reasons I care about the length of the changelog section of
our rpms is that it pollutes our (Spacewalk's) database when such rpms
are synced/pushed -- we store each item as separate record in
rhnPackageChangeLog, and if new version of the same package is added,
it generally contains all the versions that the previous version
contained, plus one new item/record. Which of course we might want to
refactor somehow, eventually.
But still -- do we really need changelogs going all the way back?
I'd vote for trimming down the length of changelogs (1 year perhaps).
-Milan
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
I'd be interested in knowing if there is any general guideline from
Fedora for package maintainers that we would need to adhere too?
Otherwise, I'd go with a year as well. This allows for those changelogs
to be consistent through Satellite releases which use those packages as
well.
Cliff.
_______________________________________________
Spacewalk-devel mailing list
Spacewalk-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/spacewalk-devel
