cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vadim Gritsenko" <vadim.gritse...@verizon.net>
Subject RE: @version CVS keyword consistency (was: Re: Lucene package)
Date Sun, 23 Dec 2001 06:07:55 GMT
> From: giacomo [mailto:giacomo@apache.org]
> 
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, Gianugo Rabellino wrote:
> 
> > giacomo wrote:
> >
> > > Could the author of the Lucene package add a CVS id and an author
line
> > > as it is the case for (I hope) all other source file? And also
adjust
> > > the coding according to the convention used here at Cocoon.
> >
> >
> > Well, this was the right time to remind me that I forgot to do it
myself
> > to the code I contributed :)
> >
> > However, I found out that there seems to be no consistency between
us in
> > CVS keywords. Wouldn't it be the case to agree on a consistent way
to
> > insert version tags in the source? Basically someone is using $Id$
> > (including myself) while others seems to use "CVS $Revision$
$Date$". Is
> > there already a standard that I'm missing or should we come up with
one?
> 
> I don't know of a standard, so my proposal is to use $Id$ as well
> because it is mostly complete concerning information inserted into the
> checked in files.

How about both: Id on top of the file, and Revision/Date in Javadoc?

PS I do remember myself asking same question on this list. Nobody had an
opinion at the moment ;)

Vadim

> 
> Giacomo
> 
> >
> > Ciao,
> >
> >


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message