1 |
On 06/01/2011 06:15 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: |
2 |
> On 01/06/2011 04:08 ¼¼, Peter Volkov wrote: |
3 |
>> =4, 30/05/2011 2 14:55 -0700, Brian Harring ?8H5B: |
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 |
>> -- |
21 |
>> Peter. |
22 |
> Maybe typos in e{log,warn,info} messages and/or typos in general ( |
23 |
> variables, functions etc ) |
24 |
> |
25 |
|
26 |
And the list will grow... |
27 |
|
28 |
If we don't want to start monitoring also the context of ChangeLog entries, |
29 |
Like if someone adds a epatch line to fix a real bug in a ebuild but |
30 |
while at it fixes ebuild Coding Style for repoman/pcheck/and so forth, |
31 |
fails to mention it in the log. |
32 |
How is that different from committing just the Coding Style fix and then |
33 |
leaving it out of ChangeLog? |
34 |
|
35 |
Wouldn't it be better to just trust devs to use common sense in what |
36 |
gets into ChangeLogs, and actually be grateful about if they take the |
37 |
time to sensor the crap out from it, and scrap the whole topic? |
38 |
|
39 |
(I honestly can't remember being involved in anything this useless...) |
40 |
|
41 |
- Samuli |