[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Watchpoints for emacs lisp.

From: Adrian Robert
Subject: Re: Watchpoints for emacs lisp.
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 09:20:25 +0300

On May 19, 2010, at 7:30 AM, Ken Raeburn wrote:

> On May 18, 2010, at 04:22, Adrian Robert wrote:
>> Chad Brown <chadpbrown <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>> How much history?  These are the last few lines of `bzr log':
>>>     revno: 1
>>>     committer: Jim Blandy <jimb <at> redhat.com>
>>>     timestamp: Thu 1985-04-18 00:48:29 +0000
>>>     message:
>>>       entered into RCS
>> Hmm, interesting, I didn't realize Redhat was around in 1985!
>> (In other words, why is revision of the logs taking place and can it be 
>> stopped?)
> I assume it's probably something like mapping the FSF account "jimb" 
> consistently to the most recent email id he's using in the logs as of the 
> (re-)conversion date, since the CVS logs don't have the email info.  There 
> are ChangeLog files which have email addresses, but since they're not a 
> standard part of every software project, and they're not always updated as 
> part of the same CVS commit (and certainly weren't updated in the same 
> instant with RCS), it wouldn't surprise me if the conversion tool didn't try 
> to use them for figuring out email addresses.  And really, it would be much 
> more of a manual process, since the email address and FSF account name don't 
> necessarily have some obvious and easy-to-program correspondence.
> Even if someone did go back and rewrite the old commits with the old email 
> addresses people were using at the time, I don't know about bzr, but git 
> would see it as a completely rewritten history, resulting in new commit ids, 
> etc.  I've wasted enough time dealing with VCS issues with Emacs, and still 
> haven't quite untangled from the bzr switch; personally I'd rather this just 
> not get "fixed".

I agree.. I was getting a bit mixed up with ChangeLogs.. it would have been 
good though difficult to try to use that info instead of 1:1 from CVS account, 
but not worth huge efforts now.

Thanks for the clarification.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]