Re: CVS commits and logs

[Richard Stallman]

    >     Yes.  A single merge-commit to the unicode-2 branch represents many,
    >     many changes on the trunk (hundreds of files, often multiple changes 
to
    >     each file), so I don't include changelog info in the CVS log entry at
    >     all.  The CVS log entry more or less says "merge from trunk of
    >     changesets X-Y."

    Well, that sort of indirection is the idea, and it's currently
    possible to find the source log entries, but not using CVS alone:  the
    changeset information in the merge log refers to _arch_ changesets

Why does merging one CVS branch into another have anything to do with
arch?

What does arch have to do with this anyway?

    Even with these tags, it would still be somewhat annoying for someone
    to track down the exact original commit logs, but I don't think
    there's really any practical alternative.

One practical alternative is that we stop using arch.

Maybe there are others -- such as changing your merge process
so that it extracts proper CVS log info out of the arch data.