Re: ChangeLog entries when merging into the binutils_2.10 branch

[Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>]

David O'Brien wrote:
> 
> I'd like to request that people do not use the date in the HEAD ChangeLog
> entry, but rather the date of the merge in ChangeLog entries committed to
> branches.  Right now the binutils_2.10 branch's bfd/ChangeLog reads:
> 
>     2000-04-14  Matthew Green  <mrg@cygnus.com>
> 
>         * config.bfd: Add NetBSD/sparc64 support.
> 
>     2000-05-31  Mark Kettenis  <kettenis@gnu.org>
> 
> Which implies time has gone backwards.  With GNU software the ChangeLog
> rather then the CVS logs are what I've been told to go by to determine
> change.  Having wrong dates for changes makes it harder for people to
> decided if they should update their binutils_2.10 source used in their
> various projects.

My memory of the policy on this is that:

	o	the ChangeLog ordering reflects the
		commit ordering.  You really can't 100%
		trust the date/time.

	o	The date should roughly reflect the time
		that the change was committed

	o	(but) there needs to be a certain level
		of flexability as people live real lives
		in real timezones :-)

Personally (i.e. not not policy by any streach of the imagination but
still a fairly common pratice) when pulling a patch over to a branch and
applying it I'll create an entry like:

	2000-05-31  Andrew Cagney ....

		From 2000-04-14  Andrew Cagney  ....
		* config.bfd: Add NetBSD/sparc64 support

so that the original and the updated ChangeLog dates are retained.  If
you've ever had to mine through ChangeLogs for specific changes, you
tend to appreciate this.

	enjoy,
		Andrew