[openssl-users] OpenSSL version 1.0.2l published
Mark H. Wood
mwood at iupui.edu
Fri Jun 2 13:32:48 UTC 2017
On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 09:18:26PM -0400, Viktor Dukhovni wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 2017, at 10:54 AM, Wouter Verhelst <wouter.verhelst at fedict.be> wrote:
> > It might be useful to make that point at the start of the CHANGES file,
> > then. Currently, it just says "Changes between X.Y.Zx and X.Y.Zy
> > [date]". While that doesn't claim to be complete, the simple word
> > "CHANGES" invokes the idea of a changelog, which should be complete --
> > and this file is not. If it's not meant to be, fine -- but then it
> > doesn't hurt to say so, and it would alleviate some confusion.
> Sure, would "Major changes" be sufficient? This is essentially
> a RELEASE_NOTES file, not a comprehensive change log, which is
> subsumed by git.
Exactly. Lots of us have been trained by much experience that a file
named CHANGES contains *all* of the changes, while a file named
RELEASE_NOTES includes selected changes of particular significance.
It's confusing to call a release-notes file CHANGES.
Appending a note that, for a full change log, [DO THIS], would probably
be well received.
Mark H. Wood
Lead Technology Analyst
Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis
755 W. Michigan Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the openssl-users