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?
In response to
pgadmin-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2010-12-31 15:03:33|
|Subject: Re: Trac tickets|
|Previous:||From: Magnus Hagander||Date: 2010-12-31 14:53:38|
|Subject: Source reindenting - it is done|