From owner-cvs-all Thu May 2 0: 4:13 2002 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (mta6.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.240]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6112237B41C; Thu, 2 May 2002 00:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kokeb.ambesa.net ([66.122.214.64]) by mta6.snfc21.pbi.net (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 (built May 7 2001)) with ESMTP id <0GVH00EZL2AU9S@mta6.snfc21.pbi.net>; Thu, 02 May 2002 00:04:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kokeb.ambesa.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kokeb.ambesa.net (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g4279hEq009795; Thu, 02 May 2002 00:09:43 -0700 (PDT envelope-from makonnen@pacbell.net) Received: (from mikem@localhost) by kokeb.ambesa.net (8.12.3/8.12.3/Submit) id g4279hnq009794; Thu, 02 May 2002 00:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 02 May 2002 01:09:42 -0600 From: Mike Makonnen Subject: Re: cvs commit: src UPDATING In-reply-to: <200205020238.g422cIm56240@freefall.freebsd.org> To: Mike Silbersack Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <1020323382.3871.37.camel@kokeb.ambesa.net> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution/1.0.2 Content-type: text/plain Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <200205020238.g422cIm56240@freefall.freebsd.org> X-Authentication-warning: kokeb.ambesa.net: mikem set sender to makonnen@pacbell.net using -f Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Wed, 2002-05-01 at 20:38, Mike Silbersack wrote: > silby 2002/05/01 19:38:18 PDT > > Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_4) > . UPDATING > Log: > Remove entry about ephemeral port range change MFC, as it > has been un-MFC'd. > > Revision Changes Path > 1.73.2.65 +0 -17 src/UPDATING Applogies if this has already been beaten to death. It seems to me that when changes like this one (where a previously made change is un-done) are required in UPDATING, it would be better to add another entry stating that the change has been un-done, instead of removing it completely from UPDATING. Simply removing the relevant entry can potentially be confusing to users who _do_ read UPDATING. My reasoning is as follows: if the original change was important enough to warrant a mention, then its reversal must also be just as important. Cheers, Mike Makonnen. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message