> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> On 2002-01-23 11:39:47 "Sander Striker" wrote:
>>> From my limited experience with CVS it seems that it only pops up an
>>> editor once for each directory being committed, and all files in that
>>> get the same log message. I would very much prefer to have an editor
>>> instance per file.
>> /me shudders at that thought
>> AFAIK the log message is associated with the entire commit (which is
>> atomic, unlike cvs). Splitting out log messages per file will be a pain.
>> If you want this, commit per file ;)
> But then it isn't atomic.
You didn't think I was seriously suggesting you would commit per file,
> Yes, the log message is associated with the entire commit
> (or one directory's worth of files),
> but I like to say what I've done to each file. Even if all the edits
> are part of the same logical change, the implementation details are
> different from file to file.
Yes, I can see where you are comming from... May be a matter of
However, I think that currently we have this:
revision -> log message
And you would like:
file -> revision -> log message
Maybe I am totally wrong on how it works now, but then one of the
developers that knows can correct me :).
> If the log for the previous file is automatically inserted into
> the editor session for this file, it's very easy to skip past ones
> that don't need changing.
I already see myself sitting hitting save/exit for every file in
a large N file commit.
> Anyway, what's so special about a single directory that makes it
> sensible to have the messages the same for all files within it?
> Per-commit is sensible, and so is per-file, but per-directory is
> neither one thing nor the other.
And that is why per-directory is not in svn.
>>> I've used a source control system which ran as an interactive command
>>> line program, with rudimentary editing facilities for log messages built
>>> in (as well as being able to invoke an editor). The nice thing about it
>>> was that it had escape sequences, like tilde escapes in "mail". The most
>>> useful one was the ability to call up the messages for earlier files and
I was wondering what you meant by this. Earlier files == files in the same
commit you already wrote a message for.
>>> use them as a basis for the current one. That might be hard to do with a
>>> separate editor process, unless it had access to a set of temporary files
>>> containing the texts.
>> I don't think anyone feels like writing a portable editor, just for log
> No. But might it be possible to make the text of the earlier messages
> available in a form readable by an ordinary editor? Is there a hook
> somewhere, into which I could put a function/program to collect them?
I don't think svn will have per file commit messages (guys, please correct
me if I'm wrong!), so this would make this question irrelevant.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:58 2006