Le vendredi 05 octobre 2007 à 13:36 +0530, Srinivasa Ragavan a écrit :
> 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.

First, consistency : evolution/e-d-s are almost the only modules on
GNOME using "micro" message for SVN commit. And it isn't even consistent
across evolution maintainers ;)

Second, being self-contained (and therefore, ease of use for external
maintainers / lurkers / packagers / release-team). You are only thinking
of svn log when using viewcvs. But if you are, just like me, subscribed
to svn-commit mailing list, it is really much easier to see directly
what it a commit purpose (fix a typo, a bug, etc) without having to rely
on another tool / website. Same apply when using svn log command

It is the same reason why we ask people, when requesting freeze break,
to attach patch to mail and not just a link to bugzilla :)

(Just to be clear, this suggestion is not done with my release-team
hat :)
Frederic Crozat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Evolution-hackers mailing list

Reply via email to