CHANGES

[Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>]

I know I've said this before, but having copies of
"Changes in Apache 2.2.5" under the -trunk CHANGES file,
as well as the 2.0.x stuff in both trunk and 2.2
means that we are pretty much assured that they will
get out of sync.

I'd like to re-propose that the CHANGES files only
refer to changes related to that MAJOR.MINOR release
and, at the end, refer people to the other CHANGES
files for historical purposes (except for Apache 1.3
which will maintain CHANGES history since the beginning).

Comments? I'd like to actually implement this for
the T&R Friday.

Re: CHANGES

[Niklas Edmundsson <ni...@acc.umu.se>]

On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Jim Jagielski wrote:

> I know I've said this before, but having copies of
> "Changes in Apache 2.2.5" under the -trunk CHANGES file,
> as well as the 2.0.x stuff in both trunk and 2.2
> means that we are pretty much assured that they will
> get out of sync.
>
> I'd like to re-propose that the CHANGES files only
> refer to changes related to that MAJOR.MINOR release
> and, at the end, refer people to the other CHANGES
> files for historical purposes (except for Apache 1.3
> which will maintain CHANGES history since the beginning).
>
> Comments? I'd like to actually implement this for
> the T&R Friday.

I'm no committer or anything, but it sounds like the sane way to do 
it.

/Nikke
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  Niklas Edmundsson, Admin @ {acc,hpc2n}.umu.se      |     nikke@acc.umu.se
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  I keep trying to lose weight, but it keeps finding me
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=