Travis Vitek wrote:
I've noticed that we aren't being consistent about the changelog text for merged changes. Here are a few examples.http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=617627&view=rev http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=614790&view=rev http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=612563&view=rev http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=616004&view=rev As you can see there isn't much consistency. Sometimes we copy the date-user-email line from the original commit, simetimes we don't. Sometimes we list the jira issue number on a line of its own. Is therean expected or required format for the merge changelogs?
We started out with the second one on your list for merges involving just one change. The generic form I've seen is the third one down, i.e., http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=612563 It scales beyond merging just a single change. FWIW, I've been waffling on how/when it's best to do merges during development. There are cases when I'd rather we hold off on merging a change until it's gotten more exposure, both on the list and in nightly testing. That way, when the change turns out to cause problems on some platforms it only needs to be fixed on trunk. In these cases, it might make sense to wait and merge a whole bunch of good changes instead of just one. Then there are trivial changes that are probably best merged right away and waiting would just add unnecessary overhead. For these, the simple format should be good enough. After Feature Freeze, our release process says that only the RM does merges. Unless the RM wants to merge each change individually the multi-change format is the only one that makes sense. Martin
Travis
