On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 22:12:15 +0200 Tom Hacohen <t...@stosb.com> said:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Cedric BAIL <cedric.b...@free.fr> wrote: > > > Well, I did think about that before doing the commit, but as it only > > change internal function nothing can be seen by our user right now. > > That's why I didn't update the ChangeLog. If the consensus is to add, > > so no problem for me, I will add it. > > > > Nah, I think we shouldn't add to changelog, because as you said, it's > internal. > Next patch, which changes a lot, deserves a changelog entry... agreed. changelog is not a substitute for svn commit logs. it is a way of summarizing changes for the purpose of a user who updates from 1.0 to 1.0.1 or 1.1 - so they see "aaah - so these new things exist, bugs fixed, these will affect me or improve things for me". the changing of some internal struct names makes precisely 0 difference to the user here. as tome said - it's preparation for later changes that WILL make a difference and deserve some changelog action. -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Colocation vs. Managed Hosting A question and answer guide to determining the best fit for your organization - today and in the future. http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
