This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: changelog rotation...
On Jan 17, 2:39pm, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> I've honestly no idea on what to do here (one of those cases where you
> wish the coding standard took the decision away from you). I guess there
> are two choices:
>
> ChangeLog-NNNN (unix - 14) -> ChangeLog.NNN (dos 8.3)
>
> ChangeLog.NNN (unix and dos) (we could start numbering from 190 :-)
>
> Much that I totally hate it the latter has merit in that (if I
> understand correctly) it is similar to what is used used by EMACS and
> EMACS is kind of the technical suplement to the coding standard.
My unix biases are showing here, but I much prefer ChangeLog-NNNN.
I'm not sure I understand what the problem is for DOS anyway.
ChangeLogs are not buildable, so they don't have to be referred to in
Makefiles or any other part of the configury, right? And we do have a
mechanism for mapping colliding names to other (non-colliding) names
when creating a tar file for such systems, right? Also, we're going
to only be adding a new one of these each year; this should not be
too onerous for the maintainer who has to update the mapping.
That being the case (if it really is the case), I see no reason to
give the ChangeLog files names that are going to annoy most of us
every time we see them.
Kevin