Re: changelog rotation...

[Fernando Nasser <fnasser at redhat dot com>]

"J.T. Conklin" wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "Fernando" == Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com> writes:
> >>
> >> Now that gcc and binutils have rotated ChangeLogs, should we do the
> >> same for gdb?  By existing convention, the new ChangeLog file would be
> >> ChangeLog-00.
> >>
> >> Is there any reason not to use it?  The only drawback is that a sorted
> >> directory listing wouldn't keep the files in numerically correct order.
> >>
> 
> Fernando> We use 4 digits for gdbtk ChangeLogs.  Maybe we should do
> Fernando> this for gdb as well.
> 
> I see no reason not to.  If we did, I'd split ChangeLog-9091 into two
> files.  There's not much of a reason for it to be one file anyway, if
> everything else is split by single years.
> 

I agree.  Are you doing the renaming?  Nobody seems to disagree and this
has been the standard practice for years anyway.  I guess it was just a 
question of someone getting around to do it.


-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat Canada Ltd.                     E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9