On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu> wrote: > On 08.12.2010 20:25, C. Michael Pilato wrote: >> On 12/08/2010 02:00 PM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote: >>> Quick question to find out what people think. >>> >>> In writing the CHANGES entry for 1.7, it would be useful to be able to >>> compare with previous releases what has already gone into the various >>> patch releases, and what hasn't. That can best happen by comparing >>> revision numbers, but given the revision cut over when we moved to the >>> ASF repo, such a comparison is tedious as best. >>> >>> Does anybody have any opinion on rewriting the revision numbers in >>> CHANGES (assuming it could be appropriately scripted)? >> I'm okay with it. There's no much gained in preserving those old revision >> numbers. Besides, if folks want the old numbers, they can be found in older >> versions of the CHANGES file, right? :-) > > If it's going to be HTML, might as well put in ViewVC links instead of > just revision numbers.
CHANGES isn't HTML, it's always been flat text. The release notes are HTML. -Hyrum
