On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Sean MacLennan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:44:30 +1000 > "Stephen Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi Sean, > > > > First comment is that you need reasonable changelogs i.e. explain why > > you are making changes as well as what they do. Also the first line > > of each changelog (which becomes the subject of any mail generated > > from git) should be a useful and relatively unique summary. > > > > These patches are an amalgamation of a lot of commits. For > example, warp.c was changed 15 times since I last sent a patch to > linuxppc-dev. warp-nand.c was probably changed even more as we kept > shifting the design. > > One of the advantages of an FPGA based design is you can work around a > lot of hardware problems. A disadvantage is that it is easy to change, > so it changes a lot. And the HW guys push the specs out to after they > actually get the feature going. There is no SW input into the FPGA > design. > > So these patches are basically following the changes to the FPGA and > changes to the hardware. As new functionality was added, I updated the > code. > > Is there a particular way I should word this to make it a changelog?
You can still describe what the code changes; either by itemizing all the changes; or if it now appears to be a whole new thing, but describing what it does /now/. :-) A changelog of "updates a bunch of stuff" is pretty much irrelevant in all situations I can think of. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
