From: Andrew Cagney <ac131313@cygnus.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Cc: kettenis@science.uva.nl, drow@mvista.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: What is on the 5.1 branch; Was: [rfc] Re: read_register_bytes() bug; was my Regcache revamp
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:17:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B827B34.3080302@cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2110-Tue21Aug2001094234+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
> Which patch came after which is implied by
>> the order in which the entries appear in the ChangeLog file.
>
>
> That order can be messed up by snafus such as CVS conflicts etc.
>
> Why is it such a problem to label the entries with the date when the
> change is committed? I don't see any disadvantages to this, only
> advantages
The disadvantage I'm aware of occures when you're trying to determine if
a specific change has been committed (I tend to be doing this a lot).
The date (especially the pre ISO date which included the time) makes a
really good identifying stamp. Per other e-mail, this is why I'll
retain the date-stamp when committing a patch. I'll even occasionally do:
> 2001-03-19 Andrew Cagney <ac131313@redhat.com>
>
> From Mon Nov 20 13:59:29 2000 Andrew Cagney <cagney@b1.cygnus.com>:
:-)
Andrew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-08-21 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-08-18 11:08 Andrew Cagney
2001-08-18 14:04 ` [rfc] " Andrew Cagney
[not found] ` <9743-Sun19Aug2001093055+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
2001-08-21 6:53 ` What is on the 5.1 branch; Was: " Andrew Cagney
2001-08-19 23:10 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-08-19 23:16 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2001-08-20 2:09 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-08-20 15:07 ` Mark Kettenis
2001-08-20 23:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-08-21 8:17 ` Andrew Cagney [this message]
2001-08-21 9:23 ` Eli Zaretskii
2001-08-21 6:52 ` Andrew Cagney
2001-08-21 6:52 ` Kevin Buettner
2001-08-21 6:53 ` Andrew Cagney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3B827B34.3080302@cygnus.com \
--to=ac131313@cygnus.com \
--cc=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=eliz@is.elta.co.il \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=kettenis@science.uva.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox