On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Mike Blumenkrantz wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 15:58:13 +0100 > Leif Middelschulte <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 2011/2/4 Vincent Torri <[email protected]>: >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Mike Blumenkrantz wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, 4 Feb 2011 14:31:12 +0100 >>>> Cedric BAIL <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Raphael Kubo da Costa >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <[email protected]> writes: >>>>>>> Em 04-02-2011 11:34, Leif Middelschulte escreveu: >>>>>>>> Hey guys, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> a couple of days ago I proposed a tag within commit message, which can >>>>>>>> be used later on to generate the changelog (over interval or check per >>>>>>>> commit). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> e.g.: >>>>>>>> CHANGELOG: added foo to bar >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This seems pretty reasonable! >>>>>> >>>>>> Do people not write the appropriate ChangeLog entries with their commits >>>>>> because they are too lazy or because they just forget to do so? >>>>>> >>>>>> If they are too lazy, the CHANGELOG: thing might help; OTOH, if they >>>>>> just forget to do that, why would they remember to add the CHANGELOG: >>>>>> tag? >>>>> >>>>> Agreed, I tend to forget, not a lazyness issue. At least for me. >>>> +1 forgetting >> They wouldn't forget, as one could provide a commit template (if there >> is such thing) for efl that includes a line like >> CHANGELOG: >> That line can be lefally commented out in cases where it just isn't >> necessary. So forgetting to modify that line alltogether (whether >> comment out, nor give a changelog summary) would be as bad as >> forgetting to give a description/summary for the entire commit. Plus >> it would be compatible to all git/svn/whatever people use and >> changelog items would be automatically removed when the commit is >> reverted. As of now, changelog commits are sometimes forgotten and get >> seperated by using an extra commit for the textfile. >> >>> even if i said a lot of stuff about ChangeLog, my mail was not only for >>> that. For me, it's about better code committed. That's exactly what raster >>> does with most of the patches by samsung, btw. He looks at them and commit >>> them with changes, fixes, improvements, etc... >> >> I don't want to object to what vincent says. I'll leave this topic to >> developers with more experience in concurrent development of a new >> version and maintaining of an old one. >> >> BR, >> >> Leif >> >>> Vincent > mmm I've only been here a short time but I'm not sure we have the manpower to > do what samsung does. We have very few active developers and even fewer who > would actively review/commit patches. As it is now, the vast majority of > patches that get sent to the list get reviewed+committed by either raster, > devilhorns, or me. Increasing the workload for us just to avoid people > forgetting changelog updates isn't a fix for the problem imo, it's a > workaround. well, again (maybe you forgot), i talked only about the core EFL. Are there so many patches for them, now ? I don't talk about elm, or e, or other libs. Waht you reviewed is mainly ecore mainloop stuff. Vincent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The modern datacenter depends on network connectivity to access resources and provide services. The best practices for maximizing a physical server's connectivity to a physical network are well understood - see how these rules translate into the virtual world? http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnlfb _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
