[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Lack of update information

Subject: Re: Lack of update information
From: Rahul Sundaram
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:52:39 +0530
Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 01:12:23PM +0100, Mathieu Bridon (bochecha) wrote:
Also, if the maintainer knows where the information about the update is
it could be nice to have it in bodhi, but not mandatory. Something like

 See some.site.org/release_notes.html for the changes.

 See /usr/share/doc/foo-1.0/NEWS for the changes.
The first one is nice, but the second one causes a problem: how can
you review the changes _before_ updating if the file listing changes
is inside the updated package ?

You can't. But this is something for upstream, in my opinion.

If upstream does it on their own, package maintainers must add pointers to it. If not, the job of summarizing the need for an update rests with the package maintainers since they are the ones pushing it to end users. Package maintainers can help upstream in the process if necessary as well. Version numbers by themselves don't mean much, if anything at all since they aren't used consistently across different projects or even between releases. The whole point of enforcing a description field is to help end users get more information beyond just version numbers.


fedora-devel-list mailing list
[email protected]

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>