Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
On Jun 18, 2008, at 19:27 , yuppie wrote:
That's not the only audience. I as a developer consult CHANGES.txt to
(hopefully) find *all* changes on the respective branch or on the
trunk that have flowed into it until now.
Can't developers use the subversion history?
It's much quicker to look at the change log, and when you work with
tarballs there's no subversion history. So no, that's not a good
"replacement" for my uses.
Nobody proposes to make releases without a complete CHANGES.txt. In a
released version you should always find all changes. The only real
difference between current and proposed policy is how the change notes
are ordered and grouped.
The current Zope 2 policy doesn't make sure the change history of
unreleased versions is complete. But that's no essential part of that
policy. And working with unreleased versions you might use subversion
I'm not sure what you're saying in that last paragraph. Copying a
change history isn't needed when you're diligent about updating the
change log whenever you make actual trunk changes.
Sorry. I was referring to the current Zope 2 (and CMF) policy:
"Note that you don't need to note the fix in the CHANGES.txt on the
trunk if you don't want to. At the time a new feature release is made,
we merge the items in CHANGES.txt from the trunk and current release
branch so that for any given release it notes the actual changes as of
I think I have done some of that merging once in a while, but always in
a haphazard fashion and did not know about the URL you provided. I
personally dislike that, and would strongly favor noting every change on
the trunk as it is checked in, just like you would do on the branch.
Well. I don't like the "if you don't want to" part of the current policy
because it just creates chaos. If everybody follows the same policy, the
merging is not that much work.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -