On 7/7/20 4:14 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Sorry it took me so long to get back to this.
Don't worry!
On Jun 24, 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
Please escape the '[':
+end_of_location_regex = re.compile(r'[\[<(:]')
check
and please a test-case for it.
check
Thanks, I've made the changes;
Sorry it took me so long to get back to this.
On Jun 24, 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
> Please escape the '[':
> +end_of_location_regex = re.compile(r'[\[<(:]')
check
> and please a test-case for it.
check
Thanks, I've made the changes; sorry it took me so long.
I couldn't figure out how to ru
@Alexander: May I please remind you this?
Martin
On 6/24/20 10:28 AM, Martin Liška wrote:
On 6/22/20 3:15 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On May 26, 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
On 5/26/20 12:15 PM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
* contracts.adb, einfo.adb, exp_ch9.adb, sem_ch12.adb,
It'
On 6/22/20 3:15 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On May 26, 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
On 5/26/20 12:15 PM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
* contracts.adb, einfo.adb, exp_ch9.adb, sem_ch12.adb,
It's not supported right now and it will make the filename parsing
much more complicated.
Hell
On May 26, 2020, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 5/26/20 12:15 PM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
>>> * contracts.adb, einfo.adb, exp_ch9.adb, sem_ch12.adb,
> It's not supported right now and it will make the filename parsing
> much more complicated.
Another colleague recently run into a problem
On 5/26/20 4:50 PM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
On 26/05/2020 15:09, Martin Liška wrote:
I see, but as mentioned it makes the parsing of the list files much more
complicated. Feel free to provide a patch that will support multi-line
entries.
Thanks! As long as there is no objection to support
On 26/05/2020 15:09, Martin Liška wrote:
I see, but as mentioned it makes the parsing of the list files much more
complicated. Feel free to provide a patch that will support multi-line
entries.
Thanks! As long as there is no objection to support this, I have no
problem giving it a try. :-) I j
On 5/26/20 2:35 PM, Rainer Orth wrote:
Hi Martin,
It looks like the hook does not accept multi-line ChangeLog entries
affecting multiple files:
* contracts.adb, einfo.adb, exp_ch9.adb, sem_ch12.adb,
sem_ch4.adb, sem_ch7.adb, sem_ch8.adb, sem_elab.adb,
sem_type.adb, s
Hi Martin,
>> It looks like the hook does not accept multi-line ChangeLog entries
>> affecting multiple files:
>>> * contracts.adb, einfo.adb, exp_ch9.adb, sem_ch12.adb,
>>> sem_ch4.adb, sem_ch7.adb, sem_ch8.adb, sem_elab.adb,
>>> sem_type.adb, sem_util.adb: Reuse Is_Packag
On 5/26/20 12:15 PM, Pierre-Marie de Rodat wrote:
Hello Martin,
First, thank you for your work on this new ChangeLog workflow. :-)
Hello.
Thank you.
I’d like to report a “regression”: I can’t push the attached patch:
remote: *** ChangeLog format failed:
remote: ERR: changed file not menti
Hello Martin,
First, thank you for your work on this new ChangeLog workflow. :-)
I’d like to report a “regression”: I can’t push the attached patch:
remote: *** ChangeLog format failed:
remote: ERR: changed file not mentioned in a ChangeLog:"gcc/ada/sem_ch4.adb"
remote: ERR: changed file not me
On 04/05/2020 20:28, H.J. Lu via Gcc wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:24 PM Tobias Burnus wrote:
On 5/4/20 9:05 PM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 08:56:16PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
What's missing right now is how will we declare a Backport format.
Can we just use s
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:24 PM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> On 5/4/20 9:05 PM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
> > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 08:56:16PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> >> What's missing right now is how will we declare a Backport format.
> >> Can we just use something like: 'Backport from
>
On 5/4/20 9:05 PM, Jakub Jelinek via Gcc wrote:
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 08:56:16PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
What's missing right now is how will we declare a Backport format.
Can we just use something like: 'Backport from
6607bdd4c834f92fce924abdaea3405f62dc'?
No. What we should allow i
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 08:56:16PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> What's missing right now is how will we declare a Backport format.
> Can we just use something like: 'Backport from
> 6607bdd4c834f92fce924abdaea3405f62dc'?
No. What we should allow is that people just git cherry-pick r11-1234-g
Once it is enforced we'd probably disallow touching ChangeLog files in a
commit with other changed files and during the
maintainer-scripts/update_version_git
script ought to check in in addition to the DATESTAMP updates in the same
commit also updates to all the ChangeLog files since the last DAT
On 4/30/20 5:29 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
In this last entry, as there were more than one ChangeLog snippets and
they had different PR lines, I wouldn't put anything into the automatically
added gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog entry.
Does this make sense? Basically, try to do what is most likely the use
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 05:14:34PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> On 4/30/20 3:45 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > If this is what is really created, then for the new file, missing * space,
> > gcc/testsuite/ that shouldn't be there and missing PR c++/94546 line above
> > it.
>
> I've just fixed all the
On 4/30/20 3:45 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
If this is what is really created, then for the new file, missing * space,
gcc/testsuite/ that shouldn't be there and missing PR c++/94546 line above
it.
I've just fixed all these, thanks!
About the 'PR c++/94546': it's mentioned in context of 'gcc/cp/C
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 03:29:10PM +0200, Martin Liška wrote:
> $ ./changelog.py
> patches/1957-c-generic-lambda-forwarding-function-PR94546.patch
> OK
> -- gcc/cp/ChangeLog --
> 2020-04-22 Jason Merrill
>
> PR c++/94546
> * pt.c (register_parameter_specializations): If the
Hello.
Based on the initial discussion with Richi and Jakub, we would like to remove
need to update ChangeLog files with each git commit. Instead, a script will be
used to extract ChangeLog entries from a git commit messages.
I've started with extraction of ~2K commits since we switched to git (
21 matches
Mail list logo
