Re: [PATCH]: Updates to Ada sources, part 1 (longish)

Eli Zaretskii
2004-06-05T10:11:19Z

> Date: Fri, 04 Jun 2004 14:31:57 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
> >
> > That'd be fine with me, but I'd also suggest to have a pointer to
> > ChangeLog.GNAT in gdb/ChangeLog, right where the import of Ada changes
> > is recorded. Something like "See ChangeLog.GNAT for details of the
> > changes."
>
> Please don't do this. ChangeLog.XXX is good for branches (as with even
> readline/ChangeLog.gdb) but not for what is ment to be the mainline.

I agree with the principle, but I don't think it is such a sacred one
that would justify asking the GNAT people to invest such a large
effort.

We need the information to be there, and the suggested compromises
achieve that with a reasonable effort.

> The ChangeLog entry should provide a summary of what was added/changed
> at this point in time - stuff like listing the new functions and summary
> of changed functions. Can we do that?

How many man-hours would you say is reasonable for such an effort?
1? 10? 100? 1000? Where, if at all, do we draw the line?

> Much of the stuff in that GNAT ChangeLog will no longer be relevant.

I understand that the problem is to translate the irrelevant suff into
something that is relevant. I suggested that at first, but the GNAT
people tell that it will take a lot of work.

> I'm told Diego took rougly a day to prepare his tree-SSA ChangeLog entry.

Who is Diego and how is the tree-SSA stuff relevant to our case?