On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Branko Čibej <brane_at_xbc.nu> wrote:
> On 08.12.2010 20:25, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>> On 12/08/2010 02:00 PM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
>>> Quick question to find out what people think.
>>> In writing the CHANGES entry for 1.7, it would be useful to be able to
>>> compare with previous releases what has already gone into the various
>>> patch releases, and what hasn't. That can best happen by comparing
>>> revision numbers, but given the revision cut over when we moved to the
>>> ASF repo, such a comparison is tedious as best.
>>> Does anybody have any opinion on rewriting the revision numbers in
>>> CHANGES (assuming it could be appropriately scripted)?
>> I'm okay with it. There's no much gained in preserving those old revision
>> numbers. Besides, if folks want the old numbers, they can be found in older
>> versions of the CHANGES file, right? :-)
> If it's going to be HTML, might as well put in ViewVC links instead of
> just revision numbers.
CHANGES isn't HTML, it's always been flat text. The release notes are HTML.
Received on 2010-12-08 22:49:36 CET