X-Authentication-Warning: kendall.sfbr.org: jeffw set sender to jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org using -f
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 09:38:20 -0600
From: JT Williams <jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org>
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: DJGPP CVS users
Message-ID: <20010111093820.B1799@kendall.sfbr.org>
Mail-Followup-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
References: <NEBBIOJNGMKPNOBKHCGHOEGCCAAA DOT tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1010107085247 DOT 21289D-100000 AT is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1010107085247.21289D-100000@is>; from eliz@is.elta.co.il on Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 09:01:33AM +0200
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

-: It's tricky, believe me.  As an evidence, please look at standards.texi, 
-: the GNU coding standards document: it has a whole section on how to write 
-: good ChangeLog entries (and that section just got larger in the last 
-: version as I  asked Richard Stallman to add some more there, because some 
-: of his requirements were never documented before).

Should the guile guys should remove the `guile-changelogs.texi' they
distribute?  It's either redundant (if the information is also in
`standards.texi') or it's disinformation (if their recommendations
are `stale' or don't otherwise agree with RMS).