Changelog Format

Tushar Teredesai sukucorp at
Wed Aug 17 14:06:25 PDT 2005

On 8/17/05, Matthew Burgess <matthew at> wrote:
> Richard A Downing wrote:
> > I prefer a straight forward chronological list of changes without all
> > the sections: Upgraded", "Added" and "Removed".
> Proposals generally are better received when they contain rationale (and
> no, "I prefer" doesn't count!) :)

:) I don't like the current format because to see what were the
changes that were say made in the last couple of days, I have to
scroll down a whole list of information that I don't need and that has
probably not changed in the last couple of days.

The major changes between the books is useful for someone who is
trying to find the changes between two stable versions of the book.

> As I am writing this, Tush's email just came through.  Maybe moving this
> information to a "What's New" page would be useful, leaving the far too
> inquisitive reader to peruse the more detailed changelog if they so
> desire.


>  As it's all related to changes made to the book though, I
> personally think they should remain together.  Obviously it'd be much
> easier to convince me if you both provided reasons *why* you don't like
> the current format.

Tushar Teredesai
   mailto:tushar at

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list