From owner-cvs-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 26 16:27:27 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77C9716A558; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:27:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E193C43DBD; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:25:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 621F046CC7; Wed, 26 Jul 2006 12:25:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:25:58 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: "Vanilla I. Shu" In-Reply-To: <20060726152505.GA63700@fatpipi.cirx.org> Message-ID: <20060726172437.V52582@fledge.watson.org> References: <200607260357.k6Q3vKK8048431@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060726161213.D48089@fledge.watson.org> <20060726152505.GA63700@fatpipi.cirx.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, "Vanilla I. Shu" Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/zh_TW.Big5/books/developers-handbook book.sgml X-BeenThere: cvs-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the doc and www trees List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:27:27 -0000 On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Vanilla I. Shu wrote: > On Wed, Jul 26, 2006 at 04:12:48PM +0100, Robert Watson wrote: >> What is 'SVN#900'? Does this correspond to some change description that >> can be found in CVS repository? > well, submitter save his copy on local subversion repository. In the future, I think it would be helpful to include at least a minimally meaningful change description in the CVS commit message. After all, that is the purpose of CVS commit messages. Cross-references to other revision control systems are useful and fine, but not a substitute for an actual description. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge