"Aaron M. Renn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1. That's the GNU coding standard and normal net practice
We can automagically generate a ChangeLog from the CVS log. This way,
you have history information accessible in two different ways. Often
ChangeLogs are more convenient, and often CVS logs are more
convenient.
> 2. I keep a detailed list of changes in a ChangeLog. The CVS commit
> might encompass several changes that I did not bother to list in my
> commit log message.
The CVS commit log should be the same format as what goes into a
ChangeLog, with a small exception. When converting to a ChangeLog,
log entries which start with `#' are ignored, and log entries that
start with `{topic}', where `topic' contains neither whitespace nor
'}' are clumped together. See rcs2log (the latest version ships with
emacs) for more info.
> 3. I like ChangeLog's. I don't like CVS.
So pretend that when you do a "cvs commit", you're actually writing to
a "ChangeLog" file. :)
The program which converts CVS logs to ChangeLogs is rather smart, so
yes, it would be possible to take the current ChangeLogs that you have
and only append new commit info.
--
Paul Fisher * [EMAIL PROTECTED]
