From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> |
Cc: | Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Trac tickets |
Date: | 2010-12-31 14:59:22 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTi=LHdYtfOzAe_DR=00DJON0wXJ3LEpiRyxoeFMv@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgadmin-hackers |
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:53, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, but it requires significant manual filtering *now* to produce it
>> as well.
>
> No, it requires 30 seconds per commit that is worthy of mention.
> Dropping the changelog will mean that work gets pushed to me (or
> Guillaume) to do immediately prior to release, in a way that could
> take a few hours to extract and format the data appropriately. At a
> time when we're usually pretty darn busy already.
Well, fair enough, i guess the answer is "yes" to the question "will
you veto this" :-)
BTW, if we're keeping it, it would certainly be good if there was a
useful policy for how to deal with it wrt back branches. Perhaps there
is one today and I just don't know it? Looking at it now it seems that
the head version has a mix of head and backbranches and backbranch
versions has nothing? ISTM that's pretty hard to parse - thus I'm not
even sure that's how it's meant to be now?
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-12-31 15:03:33 | Re: Trac tickets |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2010-12-31 14:53:38 | Source reindenting - it is done |