On Wednesday, October 22, 2003, at 02:30 PM, Stas Bekman wrote:
Seconded. We try to keep the Changes files to containing only information about changes that help users decide whether they need to upgrade to that newer version or not. If we log everything, the file will become useless. We could just run cvs2lg to autogenerated a list of all cvs changes.
Well, that's a little different, and obviously quite useless.
I try to track all changes in my Changes files because I think of it as a list of changes, not only those changes that are significant to those considering upgrading. And for the most part, they don't generally make it harder to evaluate.
There is another issue with acknowledging the contributions, but it's probably not the reason to log those contributions in Changes. Perhaps we need to start CONTRIBUTORS and simply list the names of contributors there. We do change docs all the time, and trying to track those changes is not simple and certainly doesn't belong to the current Changes. Suggestions on how to improve that are certainly welcome.
CONTRIBUTORS is okay with me.
BTW, I did acknowledge that I've committed your patch, David, in reply to your email with the patch.
Yeah, I wasn't worried about that. I was just pointing out that if it was supposed to be a comprehensive list of changes, well, it wasn't. But if you guys prefer a different approach, well then never mind. :-)
Regards,
David
-- David Wheeler AIM: dwTheory [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ: 15726394 http://www.kineticode.com/ Yahoo!: dew7e Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kineticode. Setting knowledge in motion.[sm]
