On 7/20/12 11:22 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > I've seen the comment about SCMs being sufficient for tracing the provenance > of code and the changes that are made. That puzzles me. > > - History doesn't appear in source-code tarballs.
that's true but a different point and I doubt that users of a source tarballs are interested in these details > - It requires the original SCM repository or a history-preserving port of > the SCN to be available to interested parties. > > Basically, it is not a durable form of the information. I agree that this can be a problem but the SCM is not changed too often normally. But nevertheless such comments makes the code completely unreadable over time from my perspective and I would like to avoid them. Juergen > > Just sayin' ... > > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: Pedro Giffuni [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 12:52 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Coding guideline or common rules > > FWIW; > > > ----- Original Message ----- > ... >> >> Hi, >> >> I just stumbled over a commit message for the new UOF filter. >> >> I think we should agree on a common guideline for our code and how we >> contribute changes and bring them in the code. >> >> SCM's manage the change sets and the information who made the change, >> that means we don't need further comments like this >> >> ///Begin Added by wangyumin for uof2-filter from cs2c >> ... >> /// End Added by wangyumin on 2012-2-22 14:32:18 >> >> It is somewhat redundant and makes the code not really better readable. >> Can we agree on the common understanding that we don't need such >> comments and that we don't want them in the code. We should remove such >> comments wherever we see or find them. >> > > Indeed, I did mention in our local svn tutorial that those comments should be > avoided. SVN does a wonderful job maintaining the origin information. > >> Any opinions? > > > As a side note, I recently found similar prominent begin/end lines in another > project and the culprit on that project was the GPLv2 section 2a: > > "You must cause the modified files to carry prominent notices stating > that you changed the files and the date of any change." > > > It's probable that old code from GPLd derivatives still carry such notes. > > Someone will have to clean them ;). > > Pedro. >
