Oliver, I fear you are right. Here is my sad

+1 for removing $Log$

-Manfred


2005/5/11, Oliver Rossmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> +1 for removing the $Log$ stuff. There is no support for the Log (or a
> similar) keyword in subversion so I suppose it's better to remove the
> log entries from the source files as they won't get any updates. As Sean
> said: all the information is in the svn logs anyway, no need from my POV
> to maintain the same information in the source files.
> 
> Oliver
> 
> Sean Schofield wrote:
> 
> >+1 for removing them.  Subversion (and CVS) keeps the same history and
> >they just clutter up the source code and documentation.
> >
> >
> >On 5/9/05, Manfred Geiler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>SVN experts, is there really no alternative or backward compatibility 
> >>solution?
> >>:-(
> >>-Manfred
> >>
> >>2005/5/8, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yes, I found that nice too :-(
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 21:27 +0200, Martin Marinschek wrote:
> >>> oh yes...
> >>>
> >>>what a pity, I liked that small tidbit of information!
> >>>
> >>>regards,
> >>>
> >>>Martin
> >>>
> >>>On 5/8/05, Sylvain Vieujot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Subversion doesn't support the $Log$ :
> >>>>http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#log-in-source
> >>>>
> >>>>As those $Log$ sections will be outdated, I think we should start removing
> >>>>them.
> >>>>
> >>>>Any thoughts ?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> 
> --
> Oliver Rossmueller
> Software Engineer and IT-Consultant
> Hamburg, Germany
> http://www.rossmueller.com
> 
>

Reply via email to