11:03 p.m.
[moved to xemacs-beta; this is not a patch anymore]]
On 27 Dec 2001, Adrian Aichner moaned:
this veto is only against the ChangeLog entry.
*boggle*
Please reformat it to become compliant with
(xemacs)Change Log
A point of policy: many other projects accept multiline changelog
headers to indicate multiperson authorship. For instance (from GCC):
2001-08-13 Roman Zippel <zippel(a)linux-m68k.org>
Richard Henderson <rth(a)redhat.com>
* regmove.c (regmove_optimize): Avoid setting a register twice in
a parallel set.
So this is a divergence from GNU ;)
IMHO, this is the only fair way to indicate true multiperson authorship
of a patch. In this case, I could probably rephrase it as
2001-12-26 Nix <nix(a)esperi.demon.co.uk>
* uniquify.el (uniquify-ignore-buffers-query-functions): New hook,
called to determine buffers not to uniquify. (Thanks to Volker
Franz <volker.franz(a)tuebingen.mpg.de>
(uniquify-rationalize-file-buffer-names): Use it...
(uniquify-ignore-buffers-re): ... reimplement in terms of it.
New function.
(uniquify-ignore-buffers-mode-re): New variable and function.
but if Volker had changed most of the patch, this could get extremely
ugly.
The header should be a single line:
> A change log entry starts with a header line that contains your name
> and the current date. Except for these header lines, every line in the
> change log starts with a tab. One entry can describe several changes;
> each change starts with a line starting with a tab and a star. `M-x
What is the rationale for this? The GNU coding standards carefully avoid
describing the precise format of a changelog entry (and, in fact, even
this ext doesn't describe things like the format of date to be used, and
several different formats are in use.)
--
`Mmm... Maybe I just like strong women that can hurt me?'
--- Vadik, on female throat-cutting doctors
11:56 p.m.
New subject: VETO: Re: [PATCH] [PACKAGES] Info / uniquify problems cleaned up
|--==> "n" == nix <nix(a)esperi.demon.co.uk> writes:
n> On 27 Dec 2001, Adrian Aichner moaned:
>Please reformat it to become compliant with
>(xemacs)Change Log
n> A point of policy: many other projects accept multiline changelog
n> headers to indicate multiperson authorship. For instance (from GCC):
I actually tend to agree with you, Nix. In an effort to please both
sides I have changed the entry to:
2001-12-26 Nix <nix(a)esperi.demon.co.uk>
* uniquify.el (uniquify-ignore-buffers-query-functions): New hook,
called to determine buffers not to uniquify.
(uniquify-rationalize-file-buffer-names): Use it...
(uniquify-ignore-buffers-re): ... reimplement in terms of it.
New function.
(uniquify-ignore-buffers-mode-re): New variable and function.
Co-authored with Volker Franz <volker.franz(a)tuebingen.mpg.de>.
Which is now in CVS. I hope that is acceptable to both sides of the
opinion.
--
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: 10D5C9C5>---|
| XEmacs - It's not just an editor. |
| It's a way of life. |
|------------------------------------<youngs(a)xemacs.org>---|
5:46 a.m.
New subject: VETO: Re: [PATCH] [PACKAGES] Info / uniquify problems cleaned up
>>>> "nix" == nix
<nix(a)esperi.demon.co.uk> writes:
nix> What is the rationale for this? The GNU coding standards
This is not a GNU project. We adopt some GNU coding standards as is,
modify others, and reject others.
nix> carefully avoid describing the precise format of a changelog
nix> entry (and, in fact, even this ext doesn't describe things
nix> like the format of date to be used, and several different
nix> formats are in use.)
Patchbots and ChangeLog-aware software used by maintainers.
Consistency.
M-x add-change-log-entry formats things a specific way. Please use
that format unless there's a very good reason otherwise.
I think multiple authorship is a good reason to change the
documentation, myself. It would not be hard to arrange to accept the
format you used.
--
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
Don't ask how you can "do" free software business;
ask what your business can "do for" free software.
2:44 p.m.
New subject: VETO: Re: [PATCH] [PACKAGES] Info / uniquify problems cleaned up
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen(a)xemacs.org> writes:
M-x add-change-log-entry formats things a specific way. Please use
that format unless there's a very good reason otherwise.
I think multiple authorship is a good reason to change the
documentation, myself. It would not be hard to arrange to accept the
format you used.
FWIW, change-log-mode in Emacs has this regexp:
;; Acknowledgements.
("\\(^\t\\| \\)\\(From\\|Patch\\(es\\)? by\\|Report\\(ed by\\|
from\\)\\|Suggest\\(ed by\\|ion from\\)\\)"
I've always assumed it traces back to some coding standard that
suggest that these forms should be used, so I'm using them. (Hmm,
add-log.el seems to be in need of syncing as well..)
10:56 p.m.
New subject: VETO: Re: [PATCH] [PACKAGES] Info / uniquify problems cleaned up
>>>> "nix" == nix
<nix(a)esperi.demon.co.uk> writes:
nix> [moved to xemacs-beta; this is not a patch anymore]]
nix> On 27 Dec 2001, Adrian Aichner moaned:
> this veto is only against the ChangeLog entry.
nix> *boggle*
Hi Nix,
boggle not for I am no bugbear!
> Please reformat it to become compliant with
> (xemacs)Change Log
nix> A point of policy: many other projects accept multiline changelog
nix> headers to indicate multiperson authorship. For instance (from GCC):
nix> 2001-08-13 Roman Zippel <zippel(a)linux-m68k.org>
nix> Richard Henderson <rth(a)redhat.com>
nix> * regmove.c (regmove_optimize): Avoid setting a register twice in
nix> a parallel set.
nix> So this is a divergence from GNU ;)
XEmacs is a divergence from GNU,
and a pretty good one too :-)
nix> IMHO, this is the only fair way to indicate true multiperson
nix> authorship of a patch. In this case, I could probably
nix> rephrase it as
I did not miss your point.
nix> 2001-12-26 Nix <nix(a)esperi.demon.co.uk>
nix> * uniquify.el (uniquify-ignore-buffers-query-functions): New hook,
nix> called to determine buffers not to uniquify. (Thanks to Volker
nix> Franz <volker.franz(a)tuebingen.mpg.de>
nix> (uniquify-rationalize-file-buffer-names): Use it...
nix> (uniquify-ignore-buffers-re): ... reimplement in terms of it.
nix> New function.
nix> (uniquify-ignore-buffers-mode-re): New variable and function.
nix> but if Volker had changed most of the patch, this could get extremely
nix> ugly.
> The header should be a single line:
>> A change log entry starts with a header line that contains your name
>> and the current date. Except for these header lines, every line in the
>> change log starts with a tab. One entry can describe several changes;
>> each change starts with a line starting with a tab and a star. `M-x
nix> What is the rationale for this? The GNU coding standards
Stephen already gave a good explanation.
Until we get a proposal for extending the XEmacs changlog format
approved, programs and documentation changed, we will have to veto
violations of the current standard.
nix> carefully avoid describing the precise format of a changelog
nix> entry (and, in fact, even this ext doesn't describe things
nix> like the format of date to be used, and several different
nix> formats are in use.)
Yes, and all this sucks :-)
Nix, if you feel strongly enough about this, why don't you write up a
proposal for combining best practices in changelog land and get it
approved by xemacs-review? You don't need to implement the solution,
but a good proposal would be a good starting point for the
documentation change.
Thanks for stirring this up!
Adrian
nix> --
nix> `Mmm... Maybe I just like strong women that can hurt me?'
nix> --- Vadik, on female throat-cutting doctors
--
Adrian Aichner
mailto:adrianï¼ xemacs.org
http://www.xemacs.org/
8154
days inactive
8155
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Adrian Aichner -
Nix -
Simon Josefsson -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Steve Youngs