[gentoo-dev] git? [was: Re: Devmanual text on ChangeLogs]
On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:06:47PM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: ... the time alone if you have to stop on each package to wait for echangelog to get done just doubles the amount of time you have to put into committing them. That's just not worth the effort. Won't moving the tree to git will make this a moot discussion? These and similar solutions look more and more lika a band-aid to the defecencies of cvs. What is it really that is holding us up? A dev to spearhead the move? -- Eray Aslan Developer, Gentoo Linux eras at gentoo.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] git? [was: Re: Devmanual text on ChangeLogs]
On Sunday 01 of May 2011 12:09:15 Eray Aslan wrote: On Sun, May 01, 2011 at 12:06:47PM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: ... the time alone if you have to stop on each package to wait for echangelog to get done just doubles the amount of time you have to put into committing them. That's just not worth the effort. Won't moving the tree to git will make this a moot discussion? These and similar solutions look more and more lika a band-aid to the defecencies of cvs. No, because ChangeLogs could be dropped even now (and generated for rsync using cvs2cl tool) since ebuild history is already available in CVS (sources.gentoo.org). This discussion is about what tree changes are and which aren't relevant enough for users to be redundantly documented in ChangeLog files assuming they're to be kept for now. -- regards MM signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
