Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2011 21:47:39 -0400 From: Glen Barber <gjb@FreeBSD.org> To: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, Warren Block <wblock@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/bsdinstall chapter.sgml Message-ID: <4E924EBB.10109@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <4E923E2E.8070809@FreeBSD.org> References: <201110091703.p99H3AXT011263@repoman.freebsd.org> <4E91DAA9.1060103@FreeBSD.org> <4E923E2E.8070809@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On 10/9/11 8:37 PM, Gabor Kovesdan wrote: > On 2011.10.09. 19:32, Glen Barber wrote: >> Consistent pre-populated commit messages: Another reason conversion to >> SVN would be a "Good Thing(Tm).":-) > What's wrong with the current template? What does SVN do better? No > criticism, just curiosity because I haven't noticed any difference. > SVN consistently populates the commit message with certain fields; Reviewed by, Submitted by, etc. I've personally seen CVS commits lack these fields, which seems to depend on where within the tree the commit is being done. It hasn't yet annoyed me enough to ask someone why. It is annoying though. -- Glen Barber | gjb@FreeBSD.org FreeBSD Documentation Project [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJOkk7AAAoJEFJPDDeguUaj8RMIAK4Mcf4Q9ZFdayZYODb/RbmU ImcQMVe9q1YgeCqlODuSwsVyLBvaEOaXQ+GfCREgT+IVghTBKniHTVQt3OHuhFpu fxZl3T6b+a8cYtJ408HIkEm7H9Mz2dPsFu+8ZmZIekP0C6YNbM53TpVbZOOukLHx J3PqiM/hfaM92MPeQCmZ+l5nVQZOUsI6Ita3rCIv9d2qchUiF9nnIzmQ+uyTPggv sUmIRU4vxcZ6RkCwBpInkOhY4R6o3fuK+jf8/8oxf/kHhWoR8E0c2sp/rXV9tg/V z8RSQpwA5QRy5nYGnKQLB5R/7dXpqfmlJeVG6qwzuEsZjrfmijW5+GQbUTijl+Y= =dloR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E924EBB.10109>