[MPlayer-DOCS] homepage repository --> Subversion

[The Wanderer]

Oded Shimon wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 18, 2006 at 09:06:34AM +0100, Attila Kinali wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:44:03 +0200 Oded Shimon
>> <ods15 at ods15.dyndns.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> SVN: r56 - <first line of description> (trunk/ mplayer.c mencoder.c libmpdemux/demuxer.c)
>> 
>> What is the reason to add here the first line of description? To my
>> experience this often does not say much about the patch, so we
>> could leave it just away. Beside, it will move the file names over
>> the right end of the window and thus hide them (which is bad as i
>> usualy scan the cvs log for changes in the files i care about)
> 
> I guess I wanted it mostly for libnut, as there I barely have 5 files
> anyway, but OK, I suppose this would be better?
> 
> SVN: repository r56 trunk/ - mplayer.c mencoder.c libmpdemux/demuxer.c (<first line of description>)

I still don't see any benefit to having the first line of the
description in the Subject line, especially since it could bloat the
size of said Subject considerably, but other than that this mostly does
look okay by me.

(I would consider the lack of a per-file version number to be a design
flaw in the system, for the reason noted by implication below, but I can
understand how it might conceivably be necessary in order to provide
desirable features like file renaming.)

> BTW, would you like anything special for added/removed files?.. I'll
> just list them with all others...

Well, since there's no clean way to specify the revision each changed
file is being modified *from* (since there's not remotely any guarantee
that all changed files in a single mail will be going from the same
revision number)... I don't think it's necessarily worth special-casing
it, no, at least not if that would complicate the overall syntax of the
Subject lines.

-- 
       The Wanderer

Warning: Simply because I argue an issue does not mean I agree with any
side of it.

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.