| 1 |
On Wednesday 17 August 2005 08:16 am, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 18:18 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > logic: |
| 4 |
> > - i'm lazy |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> That's not a valid argument - you can use a bash function for calling |
| 7 |
> echangelog and repoman as shown numerous times on this list. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
it was part joke and part seriousness ... i already have my commits scripted |
| 10 |
with echangelog/repoman, but that isnt the point |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> > - i hate typing the samething twice (yes, bash scripting with echangelog |
| 13 |
> > can kind of take care of this) ... it doesnt handle if you want to use |
| 14 |
> > different commit messages for different files |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Can you give an example of why you would want to use different commit |
| 17 |
> messages in a single commit? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
i delete one version for being old, stabilize another ebuild, and add yet |
| 20 |
another ebuild as a rev bump |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> > - forces cvs log messages to actually be worthwhile to read and makes |
| 23 |
> > browsing cvs history much nicer (it's very easy to look at the |
| 24 |
> > differences between two files and match up a good commit message rather |
| 25 |
> > than trying to figure out what message in the ChangeLog goes with it, |
| 26 |
> > assuming there is one) |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> See my first answer (bash function). |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
which does not matter if you commit individual files firest with different |
| 31 |
messages before running your bash funcs |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
it also pollutes the cvs log history for files ... if i make different fixes |
| 34 |
to different files but only commit with one message, you easily get a lot of |
| 35 |
noise |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> > - easily standardize ChangeLog format wrt to header, copyrights, |
| 38 |
> > licensing, message formatting, name/date format |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Already done by echangelog. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
not everyone uses echangelog |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> > - generate dates in UTC down to the second rather than having devs hand |
| 45 |
> > type them in their local timezone for just the current day |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> I thought echangelog already did this based on TZ? |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
it does, but not everyone uses echangelog |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
> > - maybe some other things i havent thought of |
| 52 |
> > - i'm lazy |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> See my first answer (bash function). |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
heaven forbid you get a joke and laugh once in a while |
| 57 |
-mike |
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives