Re: [Xen-devel] API Changelog

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John Levon writes ("[Xen-devel] API Changelog"):
> Now I remember why I didn't want a file in the source tree. There's
> absolutely no sensible way to have any entries there that give a
> meaningful link to the actual details - you can't link to the rev until
> it's merged, and you can't commit until the rev is written in it.

I think  hg ann -cnaud  answers that problem quite well,
as Keir points out.

Mark Williamson writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] API Changelog"):
> How about just including the changelog entry as a separate commit?  That way 
> the commit ID of the real change can be recorded accurately.

Oh dear, please no.  That will involve manual pratting about (which
will therefore go wrong) when we have a useable automatic system for
this.  If we abolutely have to we could use some kind of keyword
expansion annotation system but personally I think that's a waste of
effort when hg ann is quite adequate.

> The developer would generate the patch series using hg export - which they 
> probably use already.  All that's needed at the other end is to apply the 
> patch using hg import so that the commits keep the proper changeset IDs.
> 
> Another reason hg import is handy is that the developer who sent the patch 
> won't get a conflict the next time they hg pull mainline.

These are orthogonal questions, I think.

Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel