When we began to make Evolution patches 5 years ago, we were required to make the commit changlog the same as the one in ChangeLog by Evolution maintainers. So we have been doing copy&paste for all the time.

Maybe this has been changed. But I still prefer this old way. This makes the viewcvs from http://svn.gnome.org more readable. And as we don't need to write down a short log, this might take less time :)

Just my 2 cents.


Srinivasa Ragavan ??:
Oh, I remember a thread on d-d-l where there was discussion on two
ChangeLogs (one part of tree and other part of svn logs). Btw, I'm one
of those who use those short logs for svn commits and I know a few
people who copy ChangeLogs to svn commit logs.

In anycase, I really dont know/see what is the benefit of this over the
short messages. Many times with patches and review being on bugzilla,
atleast I find easy to see what broke where with just the bug number
part of commit logs over viewcvs.


On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 09:47 +0200, Frederic Crozat wrote:
Hi everyone,

I'd like to suggest to Evolution hackers, whenever it is possible for
them, to try to improve their svn commit messages.

Some of you are currently using a very short commit message
(something like "fix for bug#xxx), which make reading svn commit
extremely difficult without having to go each time on bugzilla to see
what was the fix really for. Moreover, it also adds complexity when you
are checking a file history and bump into such commits.

May I suggest you use either the same ChangeLog entry you wrote in the
various changelog file (so it is even faster, just use copy/paste :) or
even a stripped version of it (it used to be extremely useful for CVS to
see which files were changed at the same time, but it is no longer
required with svn atomic commit) ?

Thanks you in advance.

Evolution-hackers mailing list

Evolution-hackers mailing list

Reply via email to