On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, Anthony G. Basile <bluen...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On 09/15/14 15:30, William Hubbs wrote: >> I would have no problem with the council revisiting/changing this. >> >> I tend to agree that the ChangeLogs in the portage tree will be >> obsoleted when we switch to git because git's logging facilities are >> much easier to use than those in CVS. Not to mention how much smaller >> the portage tree would be without ChangeLogs. >> >> William >> > > If the argument is that there are no Changelogs in rsync, then let's write > git hooks to generate them when the repository is mirrored to the rsync > host. The only problem I see is with this is then adding ChangeLog to the > manifest and gpg signing it which has to be done at the developer's side. > But, I think the tree that users get from rsync should have the logs. > Having *both* a ChangeLog file and git log is redundant. >
I'll add this to the next Council agenda. I think this is ripe for discussion. The last discussion of this really wasn't aimed at git anyway. -- Rich
