FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.

» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-02-2011, 05:17 AM
Ulrich Mueller
Default Devmanual text on ChangeLogs

>>>>> On Mon, 2 May 2011, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:

> I don't get why someone would want to edit ChangeLogs. Could you
> list some use-cases besides editing of typos?

Fixing typos should be enough reason alone. It also happened to me
more than once that I specified a wrong bug number, or that I added
credits for a user retroactively.

Old 05-02-2011, 06:48 AM
Fabian Groffen
Default Devmanual text on ChangeLogs

On 01-05-2011 19:43:48 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> My personal feeling is that we should keep the changelogs as-is, and
> include removals, until we're on git. Then we should re-evaluate.

git doesn't magically solve all the problems!

Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
Old 05-02-2011, 06:51 AM
Fabian Groffen
Default Devmanual text on ChangeLogs

On 02-05-2011 02:04:57 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > Having the servers do that, will also allow us to provide cut down
> > Changelogs ( lets say keep that last 10 entries ) so we can provide
> > a more minimal portage tree, size wise.
> Ten is way too small. Chances are that after one round of
> stabilisations the ChangeLog entry for the last real change to the
> package will be gone. We should keep at least one year (better two)
> of history, because our aim is that users' systems should still be
> upgradeable after this time. And IMHO emerge -l should give the user
> the full list of changes since his last update.

How about forgetting the time constraint, but just keeping all changelog
entries for all ebuilds that are in the tree?

Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
Old 05-02-2011, 09:10 PM
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Default Devmanual text on ChangeLogs

2011-05-02 02:16:49 Markos Chandras napisał(a):
> On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 04:31:08PM -0700, Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 11:23:40PM +0000, Duncan wrote:
> > > What about having a dedicated server-based changlog-signing key? That's
> > > still a lot of signing with a single key, but as you observed, the hazards
> > > of a loss of integrity there aren't as high as with most of the tree
> > > content. It'd require changes, but I don't believe they're out of line
> > > with that required for the rest of the proposal.
> >
> > It means the only real trust that clients can level is on that key-
> > since it will be the last signer (thus /the/ signer) across all pkgs.
> >
> > Get at that key, and you've got the tree, versus the current form,
> > crack all signing keys and you've got the tree.
> >
> > Mind you this is ignoring eclasses, but getting eclasses sorted will
> > be mildly pointless if the rest of the solution has been
> > weakened/gutted since.
> >
> > Point is, it's not *just* about having a signature on it- it's about
> > mapping the trust of that signature back, and sectioning/containing
> > compromises. What y'all are suggesting guts that layered defense.
> > ~brian
> Then the only choice here is to ignore Changelogs from Manifests and
> live with that. You have your changelogs unprotected but you keep your
> ebuilds safe(?). As I said, it is a balanced choice that has to be made.

Generated ChangeLogs could contain server-side-generated signatures for themselves
(gpg --sign --clearsign ChangeLog && mv ChangeLog.asc ChangeLog).
(Manifests wouldn't contain entries for ChangeLogs.)

Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
Old 05-02-2011, 09:24 PM
Gilles Dartiguelongue
Default Devmanual text on ChangeLogs

Le samedi 30 avril 2011 à 11:46 +0300, Petteri Räty a écrit :
> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/misc-files/changelog/index.html
> There doesn't seem to be a common opinion on what the policy for
> ChangeLog entries is. See:
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_f829da2375f1ceab766a800913cc4998.xml
> I propose a simple new text: "Every commit should have an entry in
> ChangeLog." If we eventually autogenerate them from git logs this would
> happen any way (unless some kind of filtering system is in the middle)
> so we could already start now. I think it's better to have more than
> less information available to users.
> Regards,
> Petteri

As in any other open source project, history (even of removed files)
matters just as much as the outcome. Please make it a policy to always
have a ChangeLog entry for any changes.

Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>

Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org