httpd-docs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Yoshiki Hayashi <>
Subject Re: httpd-docs-2.0 commit message
Date Thu, 04 Jan 2001 06:09:13 GMT
"Roy T. Fielding" <> writes:

> > b) You added the mapping "'httpd-2.0/docs' => 'httpd-docs-2.0');" - since
> > this is a new thing, I didn't implement it, unless someone who completely
> > understands the manipulation that Ken did with the modules file explains
> > that this is the correct thing to do.  And it's yet more Ickyness.

Before the repository reorganization, httpd-docs-2.0 had its
own directory.  But now, it becomes httpd-2.0/docs directory
and module file maps repository name httpd-docs-2.0 to it.
As a result, all commit message from httpd-docs-2.0
repository goes to httpd-2.0-cvs, instead of
httpd-docs-2.0-cvs which does the right redirection.

My patch tried to fix it and failed.  The new one below
should fix it.

---	Thu Jan  4 12:44:59 2001
+++	Thu Jan  4 13:19:56 2001
@@ -285,6 +285,12 @@
+    # Special case for httpd-2.0/docs directory
+    #
+    elsif ($path =~ m|^httpd-2\.0/docs|) {
+	$mapped = 'httpd-docs-2.0';
+    }
+    #
     # Otherwise if there's any text preceding the first '/', return that
     # instead.

> I didn't update it because what Ken did won't work -- it ends up
> changing the mail address for those commits that *start* with a
> file under that module.  I don't like such unpredictable behavior.

I disagree. already does that for top level
directories.  This is where it's done:

    # Otherwise if there's any text preceding the first '/', return that
    # instead.
    elsif ($path =~ /^([^\/]+)/) {
	$mapped = $1;

I don't think my patch above makes much difference about
predictability.  I know it's not an ideal solution but I
believe it just works.

> I wish I had a solution, but I don't, and I'm afraid that I can't
> think of any reason why the docs people shouldn't be reading
> *all* of the commit messages and doing their own filtering,
> if necessary, according to what they want to read.  Use procmail
> or Outlook or whatever.

This is a different issue.  It has been discussed several
times and needs more discussion before the final dicision.
Until then, the old behavior should be preserved.

Yoshiki Hayashi

View raw message