From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Mar 18 13:06:27 1996 Return-Path: owner-stable Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id NAA15063 for stable-outgoing; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:06:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from DATAPLEX.NET (SHARK.DATAPLEX.NET [199.183.109.241]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA15051 for ; Mon, 18 Mar 1996 13:06:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from 199.183.109.242 by DATAPLEX.NET with SMTP (MailShare 1.0fc5); Mon, 18 Mar 1996 15:06:06 -0600 Message-ID: Date: 18 Mar 1996 15:05:54 -0600 From: "Richard Wackerbarth" Subject: Re: On commit messages for Stable... To: "stable@FreeBSD.org" , "Wes Santee" X-Mailer: Mail*Link PT/Internet 1.6.0 Sender: owner-stable@FreeBSD.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Wes Santee wrote: > After writing up the original request for a CVS commit list for the > -stable branch only, and seeing the ensuing discussion on the pros and > cons of it all, I just wanted to add that if a -stable only mailing > list isn't going to happen, is there a line in the commit messages or > some other way of telling that a piece is being checked into the > -stable branch? > > I notice many commit messages I get don't say anything about what > branch the files are being checked into, while some I've received > recently say the branch is RELENG_2_1_0. > > If there is a surefire way to see if something is being checked into > -stable, I can write a procmail recipe to filter on the stuff I want > to see which may be a compromise that we all can agree on. But it is little effort to install that same procmail filter to cause the passed messages to be posted to a separate mailing list. This would have the advantage of reducing the mail traffic at the source rather than the destination.