cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/bsdinstall
gjb at FreeBSD.org
Mon Oct 10 01:49:36 UTC 2011
On 10/9/11 9:47 PM, Glen Barber wrote:
> On 10/9/11 8:37 PM, Gabor Kovesdan wrote:
>> On 2011.10.09. 19:32, Glen Barber wrote:
>>> Consistent pre-populated commit messages: Another reason conversion to
>>> SVN would be a "Good Thing(Tm).":-)
>> What's wrong with the current template? What does SVN do better? No
>> criticism, just curiosity because I haven't noticed any difference.
> SVN consistently populates the commit message with certain fields;
> Reviewed by, Submitted by, etc.
> I've personally seen CVS commits lack these fields, which seems to
> depend on where within the tree the commit is being done. It hasn't yet
> annoyed me enough to ask someone why. It is annoying though.
... and yes, I am aware the former example is a byproduct of using the
subversion-freebsd port in place of the "normal" subversion port.
Glen Barber | gjb at FreeBSD.org
FreeBSD Documentation Project
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 487 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all/attachments/20111010/cefced76/signature.pgp
More information about the cvs-all