cvs commit: src/share/man/man4 fdc.4

[Ceri Davies]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 10:46:30AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2006-10-30 23:41, Ceri Davies <ceri at submonkey.net> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 05:01:16PM +0000, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> > > keramida    2006-10-30 17:01:16 UTC
> > > 
> > >   FreeBSD src repository (doc committer)
> > > 
> > >   Modified files:        (Branch: RELENG_6)
> > >     share/man/man4       fdc.4 
> > >   Log:
> > >   The correct date for RELENG_X manpages is not the last time the
> > >   manpage was modified in the RELENG_X branch, but its last
> > >   modification date in HEAD.
> > 
> > That means that every MFC I've done (recently, but possibly ever) is
> > wrong...  Will need some time to go through them all.
> 
> Well it depends.  Ruslan has kindly explained this in better
> words, so I'm copying him here:
> 
> % Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 20:37:24 +0300
> % From: Ruslan Ermilov <ru at freebsd.org>
> % Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man4 fdc.4
> % To: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida at freebsd.org>
> % 
> % On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 05:01:16PM +0000, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> % > keramida    2006-10-30 17:01:16 UTC
> % >
> % >   FreeBSD src repository (doc committer)
> % >
> % >   Modified files:        (Branch: RELENG_6)
> % >     share/man/man4       fdc.4
> % >   Log:
> % >   The correct date for RELENG_X manpages is not the last time the
> % >   manpage was modified in the RELENG_X branch, but its last
> % >   modification date in HEAD.
> % >
> % >   Suggested by:   ru
> % >   Approved by:    re (bmah)
> % >
> % >   Revision  Changes    Path
> % >   1.34.8.2  +1 -1      src/share/man/man4/fdc.4
> % 
> % This is correct in case of MFC -- if you're making a RELENG_X
> % specific change then the date should be update to the date of
> % change in RELENG_X.  Well, a common sense actually applies.  ;)
> 
> It makes sense, now that I've thought a bit about it.
> 
> If you are 'pulling changes over' from another branch, you are
> definitely modifying the file, but these changes were 'conceived'
> at the date they were made in the original branch.  Or something
> like that, anyway :)

Makes sense.

> I don't think we have to go through each one of our MFC commits
> and retrospectively 'fix' that, because this will generate a huge
> number of commits!

Phew!

Ceri
-- 
That must be wonderful!  I don't understand it at all.
                                                  -- Moliere
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/attachments/20061031/c915f3f6/attachment.pgp