| 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 |
Archives