stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brown <mark.g.br...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: relative pathnames in ChangeLogs
Date Tue, 16 Oct 2007 04:56:37 GMT
Martin,

This sounds reasonable to me. Although I wonder, is there any reason
to have a number of ChangeLogs instead of just one at the top of the
tree?

-- Mark

Martin Sebor wrote:
> After I generated/updated the latest ChangeLogs I noticed that we have
> been less than completely consistent in how we refer to changed files
> in Change Log entries. Most of the time, although not all of the time,
> we just mention the file name w/o the directory prefix. That's not a
> big deal when all the files in the ChangeLog entry reside in the same
> directory (although even then it's less than ideal), but it becomes
> a potential problem when there are files from different directories,
> e.g., include/foo.h and src/bar.h, because there may be a src/foo.h
> in addition to include/foo.h.
> 
> To avoid this potential problem I would like to propose that each file
> mentioned in a Change Log entry be relative to the directory containing
> the ChangeLog itself. I.e., file names referenced in the ChangeLog
> residing under trunk/include/ will be relative to trunk/include/, those
> reference in the ChangeLog residing under trunk/tests will be relative
> to trunk/tests, and so on.
> 
> For example, the ChangeLog entry for the following change:
>   http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=583398
> would look like so:
> 
> 2007-10-10 Travis Vitek <vitek@roguewave.com>
> 
>     STDCXX-582
>     * self/0.printf.cpp (test_errno): Deallocate memory allocated
>     automatically by rw_snprintfa().
> 
> Change Log entries that refer to files from multiple subdirectories
> (e.g., trunk/include and trunk/examples) would have to also include
> the name of the subdirectories.
> 
> Does this sound reasonable to everyone? Does anyone have a better idea?
> 
> Martin
> 


Mime
View raw message