On 5/18/06, David Anderson <david.anderson@calixo.net> wrote:
> I think this has problems. What of backports that have been backported
> into the 1.3.x branch in prevision of 1.3.2, and that have also been
> backported into hte 1.4.x branch? In which version should those
> changes go? The filter needs to be adjusted accordingly.
There's no big crisis here. Write the 1.4.0 CHANGES entry. After
that's done, it can still evolve. If something in 1.4.0 listing gets
backported to a subsequent 1.3.2 release, we just move the line-item
from one section to the other. CHANGES is a living document, not a
tag. :-)
>
> This is a large problem we currently have imho, that the granularity
> is pretty much ad-hoc. Hopefully following your advice of reading
> back through previous CHANGES will work out okay.
Well, it's not so much 'ad-hoc' as it is 'controlled by subjective
judgement'. What's key is that we have a precedent, which is a pretty
safe thing to fall back on. Anyone reading the CHANGES file should
pretty much grok what the proper level of detail should be.
We also have peer review of commits. I guarantee that you *will* get
feedback after drafting the 1.4.0 CHANGES entry. Some feeback will be
minor edits to correctness, some will be people saying that stuff is
too detailed, or stuff is too general. Stand your ground, and use
precedent to back up your argument. :-)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu May 18 19:31:47 2006