From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32714 invoked by alias); 1 Aug 2008 18:44:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 32702 invoked by uid 22791); 1 Aug 2008 18:44:10 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout1.012.net.il (HELO mtaout1.012.net.il) (84.95.2.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:43:45 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.229.228.238]) by i-mtaout1.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0K4X00EXPQP32Q60@i-mtaout1.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com; Fri, 01 Aug 2008 21:43:52 +0300 (IDT) Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 18:44:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: Subdir ChangeLogs In-reply-to: <4893474C.3000103@earthlink.net> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Stan Shebs Cc: tromey@redhat.com, stan@codesourcery.com, gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <487975AF.4030306@codesourcery.com> <48933ABA.2030601@codesourcery.com> <4893474C.3000103@earthlink.net> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-08/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 > Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:26:36 -0700 > From: Stan Shebs > CC: Stan Shebs , gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com > > Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>>> "Stan" == Stan Shebs writes: > >>>>>> > > > > Tom> Any comment on this? > > > > Stan> I thought I did... > > > > Oops, sorry Stan. > > > > Tom> The concrete proposal is: > > Tom> * Rename gdb/doc/ChangeLog -> gdb/doc/ChangeLog.old > > > > Stan> Yes. > > > > Is that an official ok? Or just agreement? > > > Since it affects everybody's workflow, I'd like to see at least one more > opinion. You asked for opinions, so here's mine: I don't really understand why we'd want to do this. The only reason I heard so far was that it will help when source and doc files are committed together. But people do this all the time, and the CVS logs clearly show the entire changeset, so I don't see the advantage. Many other GNU projects have separate ChangeLog files for the documentation. I have never heard any other project that I was involved with merging them back into the source logs. That said, I'm not going to fight against this if it is what everyone else wants.