Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Here is a queue of patches that piled up on my side. Most have been
>>> posted earlier already, find details in the descriptions. I have some
>>> more that will be posted later this week.
>>> All patches are also available at
>>> git://git.kiszka.org/xenomai.git assorted-queue
>>> Jan
>>> PS: BTW, I started mirroring the Xenomai SVN on my server. So far I pull
>>> from SVN on 1:00, 12:00 and 18:00 (CET), maybe I will subscribe some
>>> robot to the svn-commit list later. Feel free to make use of this
>>> service as you like. For me it is a tool to keep control over my
>>> various patch queues, and using only git (+stg) for this simplified
>>> things significantly.
>> I'm git-based on my side as well. At some point we should get rid of SVN 
>> altogether.
> That would be great. As I don't feel brave enough for a "git svn
> dcommit" from my cloned tree, I still have to apply patches on a real
> SVN repository whenever I have to commit on my own.

100% same case here...

> Once we switched to git, please also let us discuss how to deal with
> ChangeLog in the future. Describing modifications twice or more is not
> very efficient (nor motivating for a lazy developer). If we want some
> high-level description in that file, then let's define what to be logged
> there, and how. Its current level of details appears to be overkill

YMMV, it saved my day a few times when bisecting. It should document changes
that affect previous assumptions on the way the damn thing used to work and does
not anymore, and/or create/remove side-effects, and/or update some interface,
and/or fix the core logic in a way or another. This is not to say that it
actually always does that though.

 I would prefer to focus on more verbose git commit logs.

ChangeLog would disappear completely in favor of more detailed git logs. There
is indeed no point in duplicating information.

> Jan


Xenomai-core mailing list

Reply via email to