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 1.4277

Revision 1.4249 (maybe bad example)

Revision 1.3975

Revision 1.3882

Revision 1.3819

Revision 1.3677

Revision 1.2900

And jmmv's revbump.pl script creates these CHANGES entries.

   Jeremy C. Reed
   http://bsd.reedmedia.net/