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

Eli Zaretskii
2004-06-05T16:07:41Z

> Date: Sat, 05 Jun 2004 09:33:02 -0400
> From: Andrew Cagney <cagney@gnu.org>
>
> We've on a number of occasions seen large through to extreemly large
> merges (HP comes to mind) and on each occason the contributor,
> unprompted, ensure that a correct ChangeLog was included.

I would even be happy if the contributor would do that when prompted
(I prompted them to begin with, remember?).

However, I'm not sure we should insist on this given the contributor's
reluctance to do that, when prompted. It is IMHO enough to have the
required information readily available in the distribution; a separate
file will achieve just that.

> We're talking an hour or perhaphs two

How is this consistent with the fact that tree-SSA merge required a
full day of work to prepare the log entries?

> The way to do this is to ignore the history and just look at the final
> diff.

That will lose information.

> A bit of sed'n'sort will in a matter of minutes give the functions
> added/deleted bit, leaving just terse verbage of the other functions
> changed.

If it's too terse, it isn't worth the effort. What we need is a
description of the changes as if they were done yesterday, not an
opaque list of new, deleted, and changed functions.