Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Nathan Phillip Brink <binki@g.o>
To: Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o>
Cc: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: better policy for ChageLogs
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:04:51
Message-Id: 20110601153020.GF6493@ohnopublishing.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: better policy for ChageLogs by Markos Chandras
1 On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 04:15:31PM +0100, Markos Chandras wrote:
2 > On 01/06/2011 04:08 ????, Peter Volkov wrote:
3 > > ?? ??????, 30/05/2011 ?? 14:55 -0700, Brian Harring ??????????:
4 > >> The problem is, that's a *fuzzy* definition.
5 > >
6 > > Ok, let's start with something and then we'll add more items if
7 > > required. Currently I'd like to propose following text:
8 > >
9 > > The ChangeLog must be updated with each commit. The only possible
10 > > relaxations for this rule are:
11 > >
12 > > 1. Nonfunctional whitespace changes
13 > > 2. Changes in comments (lines starting with # in ebuild, or leading text
14 > > in patches)
15 > > 3. Manifest updates
16 > > 4. Changes in ChageLog itself ;)
17 > >
18 > > Something unclear? Anything else?
19
20 I think these are reasonable.
21
22 > > --
23 > > Peter.
24 > Maybe typos in e{log,warn,info} messages and/or typos in general (
25 > variables, functions etc )
26
27 But typos in variables and functions (which in most cases _imply_
28 functional changes) are generally bugs which should be mentioned in
29 the ChangeLog. Typos in informational messages (e{log,warn,info})
30 might also affect the user and thus be `functional' indirectly. I
31 think that the 4-item list is complete enough ;-).
32
33 --
34 binki
35
36 Look out for missing or extraneous apostrophes!

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: better policy for ChageLogs Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>