[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] gzigzag commit policy?
- To: Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <gaia@xxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] Re: [zzdev] gzigzag commit policy?
- From: "Tuomas J. Lukka" <lukka@xxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 05:13:55 +0300 (EEST)
- Cc: zzdev@xxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <20000704122319.B16943@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Tue, 4 Jul 2000, Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 04, 2000 at 05:05:53AM +0300, Tuomas J. Lukka wrote:
> > Or do you have a simple solution (that doesn't take long after the update?)
> No, although it would be possible to set up a cronjob to put up a
> changelog in a known place and update it, say, every five or fifteen
> minutes. Could also put in some postcommit magic to make sure it does
> not rebuild the changelog when no commits have happened.
So what's wrong with the repository itself as the place?
I know it seems silly to be storing a generated file in CVS but
OTOH if the format doesn't change the changes between successive
versions should be small.
I think this is one of the rare instances where storing a generatable
file is advantageous. The same would be if there were any time-consuming
generated parts (say an hour on a normal PC): storing the result in CVS
is not at all a bad idea then.
Gnome also has both commit messages and changelogs.