You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by jean-frederic clere <jf...@gmail.com> on 2024/02/14 09:53:52 UTC

using changes-entries or write in CHANGES directly

Hi,

Are there any rules to use changes-entries or write directly in CHANGES?

-- 
Cheers

Jean-Frederic

Re: using changes-entries or write in CHANGES directly

Posted by Stefan Eissing via dev <de...@httpd.apache.org>.
> Am 14.02.2024 um 10:53 schrieb jean-frederic clere <jf...@gmail.com>:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Are there any rules to use changes-entries or write directly in CHANGES?

Files in changes-entries make it easier to backport, as they will be no conflicts.

> 
> -- 
> Cheers
> 
> Jean-Frederic

Re: using changes-entries or write in CHANGES directly

Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 11:28:15AM +0100, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> So for 2.4.x on my accepted back port I have don't need changes-entries and
> I have to process CHANGES by hands as I missed creating a changes-entries
> file in trunk.

If you file a Github PR for the backport you can still add a 
changes-entries/ file there (same if you create a patch and upload it 
somewhere). It makes the change easy to merge independent of other 
commits, avoiding conflicts adding directly to CHANGES. Works really 
well (thanks Rűdiger!)

Regards, Joe

Re: using changes-entries or write in CHANGES directly

Posted by jean-frederic clere <jf...@gmail.com>.
On 2/14/24 11:06, Ruediger Pluem wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2/14/24 10:53 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are there any rules to use changes-entries or write directly in CHANGES?
>>
> 
> 
> IMHO change-entries is preferred. See http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/README.CHANGES?view=markup
> 
> I just noticed that we probably need a better cleanup mechanism for change-entries in trunk as I guess that
> we do not want to add backported changes to the trunk CHANGES file. But this problem has been there in the past
> as well that direct edits to CHANGES in trunk were not properly reverted once this change was backported.
> But the usage of change-entries should ease this process.

OK thanks...

So for 2.4.x on my accepted back port I have don't need changes-entries 
and I have to process CHANGES by hands as I missed creating a 
changes-entries file in trunk.

> 
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rüdiger

-- 
Cheers

Jean-Frederic

Re: using changes-entries or write in CHANGES directly

Posted by Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>.

On 2/14/24 10:53 AM, jean-frederic clere wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Are there any rules to use changes-entries or write directly in CHANGES?
> 


IMHO change-entries is preferred. See http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/README.CHANGES?view=markup

I just noticed that we probably need a better cleanup mechanism for change-entries in trunk as I guess that
we do not want to add backported changes to the trunk CHANGES file. But this problem has been there in the past
as well that direct edits to CHANGES in trunk were not properly reverted once this change was backported.
But the usage of change-entries should ease this process.


Regards

Rüdiger