[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: merging the unicode-2 branch (was: Re: Selection-set editing without
Re: merging the unicode-2 branch (was: Re: Selection-set editing without VC-dired)
Sat, 05 Jan 2008 01:33:20 -0800
Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:
> > Recent trends in VCS make the ChangeLog file more important. The
> > reason I dropped my opposition to multi-file commits is that I
> > realized that the info I used to get by looking at a CVS log, I
> > from the ChangeLog file instead with a suitable selective visibility
> > mode.
> Can we then proceed with the unicode-2 branch merging then?
> Sorry, I don't follow. I think there is a misunderstanding here.
> the ChangeLog per file was what was blocking the merge.
> I think that is the misunderstanding. What I asked for was not
> to "split" the ChangeLog file. It was to simplify it,
> getting rid of unnecessary duplicate entries. For instance,
> if we have
> (foobar): Change xyz.
> and on a previous date
> (foobar): New function.
> then we only need the latter. If foobar is a new function, being
> installed now, then we only need the "new function" entry.
Well, Handa-san didn't sound like he thought this would be a good
idea. Here is what he replied to you:
(3) RMS wrote:
> The most important part of the massaging is to get rid of duplicate
> entries. For instance suppose a function named foo is added and then
> changed 10 times. There will be 11 change log entries for it, but we
> we only need to keep one: "New function".
Even for a new funciton, I want to know why some piece of
code is in the current shape. I many times encountered such
a case that I don't remember why I wrote some code as the
current way. In such a case, I read changelogs and get a
hint. So, I don't want to loose the current information.
If you don't insist on having just one entry for changes of
a non-new function, please apply that also to a new
function. For instance, I want to keep all of these
(insert_from_gap): Adjust intervals correctly.
(insert_from_gap): Fix argument to offset_intervals.
(insert_from_gap): Make it work even if PT != GTP.
(insert_from_gap): Call record_insert.
(insert_from_gap): New function.
Then, for instance, I can know (or recall) that the function
is intentionally coded to work in the PT != GTP case.
And I also stated that given the experience with the work I've done for
doing such ChangeLog rewriting for the multi-tty merge the amount of
effort involved in doing this type of rewrite is non-trivial, it can be
at least a full day of work. I have yet to see any benefit from all
- Re: Selection-set editing without VC-dired, Stefan Monnier, 2008/01/01
- merging the unicode-2 branch (was: Re: Selection-set editing without VC-dired), Dan Nicolaescu, 2008/01/03
- Re: merging the unicode-2 branch (was: Re: Selection-set editing without VC-dired), Richard Stallman, 2008/01/06
- Re: merging the unicode-2 branch, Miles Bader, 2008/01/06
- Re: merging the unicode-2 branch, Nick Roberts, 2008/01/07
- Re: merging the unicode-2 branch, David Kastrup, 2008/01/07
- Re: merging the unicode-2 branch, Miles Bader, 2008/01/07