Subject: Re: doc/CHANGES documenting every little PKGREVISION
To: None <tech-pkg@NetBSD.org>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/05/2004 08:26:57
On Sun, 4 Jan 2004, Alistair Crooks wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 12:54:31AM -0800, Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> > It doesn't seem right that doc/CHANGES should document every PKGREVISION
> > bump.
> > Since that file is used to generate a webpage, it seems like unuseful
> > information for the CHANGES to list over 500 packages bumped because of
> > tiff bump.
> > I do not plan on documenting all that to CHANGES, and only will note that
> > tiff itself was upgraded.
> > Please let me know if that is okay.
> Why do you think that you have to mention every bump to PKGREVISION
> in pkgsrc/doc/CHANGES?
Revision 1.4249 (maybe bad example)
And jmmv's revbump.pl script creates these CHANGES entries.
Jeremy C. Reed