Markus Rothe wrote: [Tue Aug 09 2005, 07:36:18AM EDT]
Personaly I find it a little bit annoying to write changes twise.
One time in Changelog and one time in --commitmsg. How about using
the commitmsg for Changelog as default, but if a Changelog entry
already exists, then write nothing to
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
If you're the sort that writes good ChangeLog messages anyway, there's
nothing wrong with reusing them as the commit message. If you have a
really really good reason for not using a ChangeLog message, or if you
haven't yet written a shell alias for reusing ChangeLog
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 11:36:18 +
Markus Rothe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personaly I find it a little bit annoying to write changes twise. One
time in Changelog and one time in --commitmsg. How about using the
commitmsg for Changelog as default, but if a Changelog entry already
exists, then
Stephen Bennett wrote:
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 11:36:18 +
Markus Rothe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Personaly I find it a little bit annoying to write changes twise. One
time in Changelog and one time in --commitmsg. How about using the
commitmsg for Changelog as default, but if a Changelog
On Tuesday 09 August 2005 13:55, Simon Stelling wrote:
#!/bin/bash
echangelog ${1}
repoman scan
repoman commit -m ${1}
Even simpler, as repoman commit abort in case of errors in repoman scan:
ecommit() {
echangelog $@
repoman commit -m $@
}
add that to your .bashrc.
I use
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 12:23:20 + Markus Rothe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Stephen Bennett wrote:
| On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 11:36:18 +
| Markus Rothe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|
| Personaly I find it a little bit annoying to write changes twise.
| One time in Changelog and one time in
Well, you'd think that doing main tree CVS commit messages would be
something that everyone could do properly without being told, but sadly
this doesn't seem to be the case. S...
Believe it or not, commit messages are not just something that you type
in to keep a computer happy. These
