This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: changelog rotation...
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: firstname.lastname@example.org (J.T. Conklin)
> > Date: 15 Jan 2001 14:12:52 -0800
> > >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii <email@example.com> writes:
> > >> I actually like the split-by-year scheme. This tends to place about
> > >> the right number of entries in each file regardless of whether there
> > >> are six months or two years between GDB releases.
> > Eli> Why is this important to have ChangeLog files be of similar sizes?
> > IMO, ChangeLogs should have sufficent information density yet not be
> > so large that they are difficult to use.
> Splitting by version will satisfy the first requirement, while not
> necessarily contradicting the second. (I consider a 500KB file to not
> be ``too large''. YMMV.)
Technical point. Splitting on versions isn't easy. You could split
when the branch occures but then you end up with is argument about where
to put ChangeLogs made on the branch and merged back into the trunk :-)
> Anyway, I think we need a definitive say-so at this time (Andrew?),
> because something has to be done to get the CVS sources be usable for
> the DJGPP port again.
I should be getting error messages about this and I'm not :-(
> I will go along with whatever verdict The Powers That Be will issue.
> That includes any work that needs to be done if one of my suggestions
> for a different split method is accepted: I'm prepared to do it.
I've honestly no idea on what to do here (one of those cases where you
wish the coding standard took the decision away from you). I guess there
are two choices:
ChangeLog-NNNN (unix - 14) -> ChangeLog.NNN (dos 8.3)
ChangeLog.NNN (unix and dos) (we could start numbering from 190 :-)
Much that I totally hate it the latter has merit in that (if I
understand correctly) it is similar to what is used used by EMACS and
EMACS is kind of the technical suplement to the coding standard.
(Must ... resist ... temptation ... to point out that the world was
created in January 1970 so we should be using year offsets from then