cvs vs svn...

[wrobell]

On Thu, 2005-09-08 at 01:36 +0200, Jan Rekorajski wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Sep 2005, Paweł Sakowski wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2005-09-07 at 10:20 +0100, wrobell wrote:
> > > - atomic commit (so we can commit patches and specs with one move
> > >   and revert it easily later if there is a need)
> > 
> > A propos reverting.
> > 
> > One thing that we use (need?) and svn lacks is support for $Log$. So, we
> > would be missing autogenerated %changelog. However, I personally would
> > be happy to get rid of it, because:
> > 
> > - it only reflects commits to the spec, not to the patches (and seeing
> > that the only difference between two releases is "rel up" is confusing
> > and doesn't help one bit)
> 
> Smash the uneducated ;) Seriously having or not changelog in spec will
> not change some people habbit of putting dumb comments.
> But, most of the time changelog in spec helps.

you are right. and for me having changelog in specs is very useful.
$Log$ is not supported by svn

    http://subversion.tigris.org/faq.html#log-in-source

but i think that we can achieve appropriate functionality. give me
few days, please.

  wrobell <wrobell at pld-linux.org>