On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solip...@pitrou.net> wrote: > > Brett wrote: >>> Of course, we've talked about doing something like this before, it's >>> just never irritated anyone enough for them to sit down and *write* >>> the associated NEWS file generator, or the code to split the existing >>> NEWS file for the active branches :) >> >> I think that's overly complicated. > > Agreed. I'm not surprised Twisted uses something like that :-), but we > don't need > that level of complexity. > >> I don't see why we need anything >> more than simply NEWS/3.4, NEWS/3.3, etc. and just split the files per >> feature release since that's the interest (and merge) boundary. > > You'll have to copy stuff by hand, though, if you don't want to rely on the > merge machinery. So we have two possible file layouts: > > * (current) a single Misc/NEWS is merged from branch to branch. Pro: hg merge > copies the text for you. Con: hg merge sometimes screws up and you have to > clean up a large conflict.
But hg won't let you simply revert; at least today it said I had to either resolve the conflict or do an update -C which tosses the whole change which is just annoying. > > * a dedicated Misc/NEWS-x.y per major version. Pro: no merge conflicts ever. > Con: you have to copy the message by hand when merging a bug fix to the upper > branch. Con: it's easy to forget to copy the message (hg won't yell if you > don't > do it), so people *will* forget (and it's annoying grunt work for those who > notice it). So the question becomes do we really need to copy every entry? Beyond simply being redundant, it's annoying when doing merges because of the constant conflicts. I would argue that in bugfix releases we could say in the issue whether it stops there or propagates into the next feature release (e.g. [regression] or [bugfix]). Then it becomes habit to always specify that (and maybe even have a Mercurial extension that detects when neither is specified and throws a fit). Either way the status quo makes me not want to fix small doc typos like a missing parenthesis since this is enough of a hassle to not make it worth it. > > The major con with the current scheme *might* be solved by a dedicated hg > extension, but someone needs to have enough free time and passion to try and > write it :-) Wouldn't an extension that does the copying be easier than resolving the conflict? -Brett > >> And do >> we really need a merged NEWS file at that granularity? > > Not really, IMO. > > Regards > > Antoine. > > > _______________________________________________ > python-committers mailing list > python-committers@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers _______________________________________________ python-committers mailing list python-committers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
