[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:49:08 +0200
Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
Hollis Blanchard <address@hidden> writes:
> A worthy goal... though you don't need a ChangeLog file for that when
> you have version control logs. Your "changeset comment" just goes in
> the commit message.
Commit messages are per-file, not per changeset.
> Also, you can see that changeset comments on a project like the Linux
> kernel are not nearly as verbose as the ChangeLog standards here.
Linux uses BitKeeper, a commerical changeset based VC system.
> Even CVS, which is not exactly a shining star of version control, can
> accomplish this task very easily through either "cvs log <file>" or
> "cvs annotate <file>".
The thing is that you want a greater context than just a single
>> Remember that you should only describe _what_ you have changed. If
>> you want to clearify something, put it in a comment in the source.
> But "new variable" and "new function" isn't even close to telling you
> _what_ .
I think it is. That is exactly what you have changed: you have added
a new variable or function. If you want to describe the variable or
function in greater detail, do so in the altered file (the source.)