[commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Joel Brobecker]

I added the following entry at the top of the ChangeLog in the head
branch:

2005-12-02  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>

        GDB 6.4 released from GDB 6.4 branch.

This shows when the release was made.

-- 
Joel

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:36:38PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> I added the following entry at the top of the ChangeLog in the head
> branch:
> 
> 2005-12-02  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>
> 
>         GDB 6.4 released from GDB 6.4 branch.
> 
> This shows when the release was made.

Is this useful?  Many commits below that point won't be included in GDB
6.4.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:36:38PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> I added the following entry at the top of the ChangeLog in the head
> branch:
> 
> 2005-12-02  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>
> 
>         GDB 6.4 released from GDB 6.4 branch.
> 
> This shows when the release was made.

Is this useful?  Many commits below that point won't be included in GDB
6.4.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:54:37 -0500
> From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> 
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:36:38PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > I added the following entry at the top of the ChangeLog in the head
> > branch:
> > 
> > 2005-12-02  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>
> > 
> >         GDB 6.4 released from GDB 6.4 branch.
> > 
> > This shows when the release was made.
> 
> Is this useful?

I think it is.  Sometimes, one needs to know when a particular version
was released.

> Many commits below that point won't be included in GDB 6.4.

How about if we insert an entry for the date when the branch was cut,
and then say in the entry Joel committed that all the changes between
those two entries are not in 6.4?

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Jim Blandy]

On 12/2/05, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 08:54:37 -0500
> > From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@false.org>
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 11:36:38PM -0800, Joel Brobecker wrote:
> > > I added the following entry at the top of the ChangeLog in the head
> > > branch:
> > >
> > > 2005-12-02  Joel Brobecker  <brobecker@adacore.com>
> > >
> > >         GDB 6.4 released from GDB 6.4 branch.
> > >
> > > This shows when the release was made.
> >
> > Is this useful?
>
> I think it is.  Sometimes, one needs to know when a particular version
> was released.

People working quickly will definitely assume that whatever entry they
come across first marks the branchpoint.

I think we should have a single ChangeLog entry at the branchpoint,
and include the release date in that ChangeLog entry:

2005-11-21  Joel Brobecker <...>

        * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Released on 2005-12-02.

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Joel Brobecker]

> People working quickly will definitely assume that whatever entry they
> come across first marks the branchpoint.
> 
> I think we should have a single ChangeLog entry at the branchpoint,
> and include the release date in that ChangeLog entry:
> 
> 2005-11-21  Joel Brobecker <...>
> 
>         * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Released on 2005-12-02.

That makes sense to me. If we agree, I can make the adjustment and
update the documentation.

-- 
Joel

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Kevin Buettner]

On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:30:36 -0800
Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:

> > People working quickly will definitely assume that whatever entry they
> > come across first marks the branchpoint.
> > 
> > I think we should have a single ChangeLog entry at the branchpoint,
> > and include the release date in that ChangeLog entry:
> > 
> > 2005-11-21  Joel Brobecker <...>
> > 
> >         * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Released on 2005-12-02.
> 
> That makes sense to me. If we agree, I can make the adjustment and
> update the documentation.

Jim's suggestion sounds good to me too.

Kevin

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 10:35:08AM -0700, Kevin Buettner wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:30:36 -0800
> Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com> wrote:
> 
> > > People working quickly will definitely assume that whatever entry they
> > > come across first marks the branchpoint.
> > > 
> > > I think we should have a single ChangeLog entry at the branchpoint,
> > > and include the release date in that ChangeLog entry:
> > > 
> > > 2005-11-21  Joel Brobecker <...>
> > > 
> > >         * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Released on 2005-12-02.
> > 
> > That makes sense to me. If we agree, I can make the adjustment and
> > update the documentation.
> 
> Jim's suggestion sounds good to me too.

<AOL>

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery, LLC

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Mark Kettenis]

> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:30:36 -0800
> From: Joel Brobecker <brobecker@adacore.com>
> 
> > People working quickly will definitely assume that whatever entry they
> > come across first marks the branchpoint.
> > 
> > I think we should have a single ChangeLog entry at the branchpoint,
> > and include the release date in that ChangeLog entry:
> > 
> > 2005-11-21  Joel Brobecker <...>
> > 
> >         * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Released on 2005-12-02.
> 
> That makes sense to me. If we agree, I can make the adjustment and
> update the documentation.

I like it.  I think I'd like to see the "GDB 6.4 branch made" bit also
on the branch, so I suggest to make that change just before branching.
The "Released on 2005-12-02" but can then later be added (and I think
only on the trunk).

Mark

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Jim Blandy]

On 12/2/05, Mark Kettenis <mark.kettenis@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> I like it.  I think I'd like to see the "GDB 6.4 branch made" bit also
> on the branch, so I suggest to make that change just before branching.
> The "Released on 2005-12-02" but can then later be added (and I think
> only on the trunk).

It would be nice to have the branchpoint indicated on the branch, too.
 But people do want to know release dates when looking on the branch,
too.

The specific maneuver you're suggesting, however, is impossible if
you're doing a "post facto" branch, using -D; I know Andrew did this a
few times, and I thought Joel was going to, too.  Post-facto branching
uses a non-HEAD revision as the branch point, so you'd have to modify
history in order to get the ChangeLog entry in there before you
branched.

The hair here is the result of having two distinct "histories": the
ChangeLog, and CVS.

Re: [commit] Mention gdb-6.4 release in ChangeLog

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 09:27:05 -0800
> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@red-bean.com>
> Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> 
> I think we should have a single ChangeLog entry at the branchpoint,
> and include the release date in that ChangeLog entry:
> 
> 2005-11-21  Joel Brobecker <...>
> 
>         * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Released on 2005-12-02.

Fine with me, but I suggest a slightly different text:

        * GDB 6.4 branch made.  Version 6.4 Released on 2005-12-02.

This accounts for the possibility that version 6.4.1 etc. will be
released from the branch (in which case we still have the problem you
wanted to avoid, btw).