[Mono-devel-list] Re: [Mono-patches] r36124 - trunk/mono/mono/mini
lupus at ximian.com
Tue Nov 16 11:00:55 EST 2004
On 11/15/04 Ben Maurer wrote:
> The subversion guys seem to really enjoy the way they commit code. I
Good for them, I guess and if they are fine with it I'm happy for them.
This doesn't mean that their way of working matches ours or mine.
For example, they don't care about offline changelogs or annotate,
this doesn't mean that people should not use offline changelogs or
> > If the svn developers will add the ability to have different commit messages
> > for different files in the same commit as other revision control systems do,
> > we'll use them.
> About svn log files becoming too big: I don't even think we are making
Let me tell you something that might be news: what you think may be
different from the reality of what other people think or do.
Note the issue is not at all about the changelog becoming too big, but
about becoming cluttered.
> Also, if changes are truly related, having the information about the
> related changes when you look for log information is valuable. Having
> the logs be separate for each file seems to be separating valuable
Right, so why do we put the mono sources in some many files and
directories? It seems to separate valuable information. Let's merge
it all in a single monster mono.c file. We do it to keep the
amount of information people have to process to a manageable size.
The same holds for commit logs. If you want to see all the logs
at a time you can run svn log in the toplevel dir has it has been suggested.
> Now that we have switched to a system that has changesets, it seems
> somewhat silly to not use them. The having bigger svn log files (which
> are likely to hold relevant information!) seems a good trade for getting
When per file or per-directory commit messages are supported it will be
nice to use them.
lupus at debian.org debian/rules
lupus at ximian.com Monkeys do it better
More information about the Mono-devel-list