From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 135 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 18:07:20 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 5 Apr 2000 18:07:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 12185 invoked by alias); 5 Apr 2000 18:07:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 10520 Received: (qmail 12160 invoked from network); 5 Apr 2000 18:07:01 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1000405180640.ZM15161@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 18:06:39 +0000 In-Reply-To: <38EB6F37.A658A22A@u.genie.co.uk> Comments: In reply to Oliver Kiddle "PATCH: AIX dep.&doc fix; development guidelines" (Apr 5, 5:52pm) References: <38EB6F37.A658A22A@u.genie.co.uk> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: Oliver Kiddle , Zsh workers Subject: Re: PATCH: AIX dep.&doc fix; development guidelines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Apr 5, 5:52pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote: } Subject: PATCH: AIX dep.&doc fix; development guidelines } } 1. Has there been a final solution on how we are supposed to create the } ChangeLog entries. Peter wants each developer to create his own. This causes some oddities e.g. when Sven and I were both patching today -- article number refs get out of order, and I had to restart my commit because Sven sneaked one in between my "cvs update" and finishing writing the log message. } It'd be nice to have a solution that doesn't depend on using emacs } (I'm more than happy to learn cvs but don't have the time, inclination } or disc space to learn emacs). You don't need emacs. The ChangeLog format is pretty obvious. The only reason for emacs (or for a perl tool like cvs2cl) is to automatically insert the date and create the ChangeLog entries from the commitlogs. Which of course means that you have to edit and commit ChangeLog after you've commited the rest, which is slow and subject to races like the one I just described when working with a remote server. So I've pretty much decided I'll have to edit ChangeLog by hand and commit it at the same time as everything else. } Is the ChangeLog modified just like any other file on the cvs server? Yes. } If people can only send a patch should they still include a patch for } ChangeLog? I'd say no; let the person who actually applies the patch write the log. } 2. Should we still post patches for everything in addition to commiting } to cvs? For some things (like these AIX dependencies) it is hardly } worth it. I confess I've already fixed a couple of minor typos (no-op things, the equivalent of whitespace changes) without sending a patch to the list. But with e.g. my patch to Makefile.in, I mailed off the "cvs diff" output and then waited for the patch to come back to me before committing, so I could reference the article number in the commitlog. It appears that Sven has been doing this too. } 3. The .distfiles thing should be mentioned. I take it that we just add } and remove files from the list in it if we add and remove files? That's correct. I forget how the CVS commitinfo script works with a remote server. On a local server it's possible to write a commitinfo to check that .distfiles mentions any files that are being added. BTW, I've just been putting the finishing touches on a script to keep my local repository in sync with the sourceforge one while still preserving all my local hacks. It approximately implements "cvs update -j..." on two sandboxes (one updated from cvs.zsh.sourceforge.net, the other from my local repository) by way of an intermediate tree that serves as the common ancestor (I used the -dev-21 release). So it means keeping three copies of the source, but I only have to type three words to download everything from sourceforge and merge it into my local sandbox. If anyone is interested in this script I can post it. It requires GNU diff with diff3, and patch. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com