Re: switching from CVS to Mercurial

[John W. Eaton]

On  7-Feb-2008, Shai Ayal wrote:

| Shall we remain with the same policy for commit message as in CVS? i.e
| no commit message is necessary but Changelog is essential? It actually
| makes more sense in hg than CVS since the Changelog diff is available
| as part of the changeset

I would like to continue recording changes in the ChangeLog files as
before.  However, now if you are submitting a Mercurial changeset, you
should leave the diffs for the ChanageLog file in place.  It is still
likely that these will generate conflicts that will need to be
resolved, but I'm hopeful that Mercurial will make it somewhat simpler
to deal with merge conflicts.

To make the information displayed by "hg view" or on the web page, it
would also be helpful to use a commit message that is a short summary
for the patch.  This message should not be a ChangeLog entry.
Instead, I think it should be something like "fixed Array<T>::solve bug"
or "new functions: superiorto, inferiorto".  If/when we have a bug
tracking system, we can include bug ID numbers here when the changeset
fixes a bug.

jwe