Re: [Xen-devel] API Changelog

[Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Now I remember why I didn't want a file in the source tree. There's
> absolutely no sensible way to have any entries there that give a
> meaningful link to the actual details - you can't link to the rev until
> it's merged, and you can't commit until the rev is written in it.
>
> The only other option is dates which is way too vague (date when the
> patch was written is a really poor indicator of when the change got
> merged).
>
> I guess keywords would help, except mercurial doesn't do them. Keir?

How about just including the changelog entry as a separate commit?  That way 
the commit ID of the real change can be recorded accurately.

The developer would generate the patch series using hg export - which they 
probably use already.  All that's needed at the other end is to apply the 
patch using hg import so that the commits keep the proper changeset IDs.

Another reason hg import is handy is that the developer who sent the patch 
won't get a conflict the next time they hg pull mainline.

Cheeres,
Mark

-- 
Dave: Just a question. What use is a unicyle with no seat?  And no pedals!
Mark: To answer a question with a question: What use is a skateboard?
Dave: Skateboards have wheels.
Mark: My wheel has a wheel!

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel