[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Annotate of Log output wrong

From: Todd Denniston
Subject: Re: Annotate of Log output wrong
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 10:43:53 -0500

Hugh Gibson wrote:
> > OTOH, it might be OK to modify the behaviour of the 'annotate' command
> > to mimic the expansion behaviour of the checkout/update command. If
> > someone were inclined to write such a patch ;=)
> That sounds the reasonable path. However, it doesn't explain why the
> output of the log command is annotated incorrectly, but the code changes
> are annotated correctly.
The code is annotated correctly because it has been checked into CVS.
The log as expanded in your sandbox has not YET been checked into CVS.
The annotated log you see is from the repository...not your sandbox. Jim is
suggesting a change to the annotate command that would expand the Log as if
it had been checked in again. ... I am thinking it will cause as much
temporal (time) confusion as the current setup, but have a less easily
explained cause.

Why is it again you are using the $Log:$ for anything anyway, i.e., what is
your purpose for having Log in your files? (often times this group can come
up with a much better way to get to the ends you desire.)

It is only the comments that you can get back better using `cvs log` or
It was originally (note: I do not have a gray enough beard to really make
this statement) put in RCS so that people who wanted to have a version log
as text in the file without having to type in their comments twice, could
comply with some strange management edict to have a change log in the
checked out file without much extra effort. Since that time some of us have
found that they really were only used for things like Software Version
Descriptions (SVD), where you needed to indicate what changed between
releases, and have now found that by making appropriate comments at checkin
(which probably apply to more than one file, or even directory) and using
tools like cvs2cl (with options to only get changes that happened between
the releases) to gather the comments together we get more accurate and
quickly generated SVDs.

> Sounds like I'm on a losing wicket here - a deprecated keyword
> substitution combined with a little-used command. I wonder if Subversion
> works in these circumstances? ;-)
I don't think it is deprecated, it is just that we have found better ways in
most cases to keep a log.
And I use annotate periodically and find it quite useful, but I don't use
Log so I am not confused by it.

Todd Denniston
Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane) 
Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]