| 1 |
On Thu, 3 Nov 2011 01:33:38 +0100 |
| 2 |
"Andreas K. Huettel" <dilfridge@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Dear all, |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > 2) I'd like to suggest that for changelogs that grow beyond a |
| 7 |
> > certain size (e.g. profiles/ChangeLog) the file is "rotated" |
| 8 |
> > similar to /var/log logfiles. I.e. the current file is renamed with |
| 9 |
> > a date extension and a new file is started. This has the benefit |
| 10 |
> > that the archived file is static and will never be retransmitted by |
| 11 |
> > rsync. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> to prevent that this becomes a victim of general ChangeLog |
| 14 |
> bikeshedding (we must rotate at a logical point, how could it be |
| 15 |
> automatized even if it is relevant for only a few files, then how do |
| 16 |
> we prevent epmty files...) I suggest the following procedure: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> In a week's time I personally, manually, will "rotate" all ChangeLog |
| 19 |
> files larger than 100k in the tree, by splitting them at |
| 20 |
> 31/12/2010-1/1/2011. The old entries file will in each case be named |
| 21 |
> ChangeLog-2010 in the same directory. (PMS: "A package directory may |
| 22 |
> contain other files or directories, whose purpose is not covered by |
| 23 |
> this specification.") |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Maybe we should keep old changelogs in a separate directory to decrease |
| 26 |
ebuilddir pollution? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> The new ChangeLog file will be identical to the current ChangeLog |
| 29 |
> file except for being truncated at 1/1/2011. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Maybe it'd be a good idea to add some kind of footer saying 'for |
| 32 |
further entries, please inquiry ChangeLog-2010 file'. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
Best regards, |
| 36 |
Michał Górny |
Archives