This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ChangeLog entries when merging into the binutils_2.10 branch
- To: obrien at NUXI dot com
- Subject: Re: ChangeLog entries when merging into the binutils_2.10 branch
- From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313 at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 18:02:59 +1100
- CC: binutils at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <20000830135124.A47187@dragon.nuxi.com>
David O'Brien wrote:
> I'd like to request that people do not use the date in the HEAD ChangeLog
> entry, but rather the date of the merge in ChangeLog entries committed to
> branches. Right now the binutils_2.10 branch's bfd/ChangeLog reads:
> 2000-04-14 Matthew Green <email@example.com>
> * config.bfd: Add NetBSD/sparc64 support.
> 2000-05-31 Mark Kettenis <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Which implies time has gone backwards. With GNU software the ChangeLog
> rather then the CVS logs are what I've been told to go by to determine
> change. Having wrong dates for changes makes it harder for people to
> decided if they should update their binutils_2.10 source used in their
> various projects.
My memory of the policy on this is that:
o the ChangeLog ordering reflects the
commit ordering. You really can't 100%
trust the date/time.
o The date should roughly reflect the time
that the change was committed
o (but) there needs to be a certain level
of flexability as people live real lives
in real timezones :-)
Personally (i.e. not not policy by any streach of the imagination but
still a fairly common pratice) when pulling a patch over to a branch and
applying it I'll create an entry like:
2000-05-31 Andrew Cagney ....
From 2000-04-14 Andrew Cagney ....
* config.bfd: Add NetBSD/sparc64 support
so that the original and the updated ChangeLog dates are retained. If
you've ever had to mine through ChangeLogs for specific changes, you
tend to appreciate this.