Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Just do the opposite (this is, use the ChangeLog entry for the CVS
> commit message), and everything's fine.
I will attempt this.
> With git or hg, I completely agree that a traditional ChangeLog file
> is no longer useful. However, in case you've downloade
> It's not that I like to commit "as fast" as possible, it's that I
> like to do fine-grained commits with tests at each step, so that if
> I screw up I can always revert to a known-good state without losing
> much work.
Yeah, git-style, as I've said before...
> The approach I have breen taking
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 12:26:28PM -0500, Eric S. Raymond wrote:
> While we're on the subject, though, I must say that I think traditional
> GNU-style Changelogs are obsolete and irritating. It's a convention that
> made a lot of sense before use of VCSes became common, but nowadays my
> Changelo
Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm not very comfortable with your editing of ChangeLog entries `a
> posteriori': The entries should represent the changes to the CVS in a
> chronological order. It's OK for me to edit the entries so that the
> changes of a day or so are properly accumulated (
Eric,
I'm not very comfortable with your editing of ChangeLog entries `a
posteriori': The entries should represent the changes to the CVS in a
chronological order. It's OK for me to edit the entries so that the
changes of a day or so are properly accumulated (since you tend to
handle CVS simila
