[issue314] integrate vimrc_grmlHeader

[Michael Prokop]

Michael Prokop <mika at grml.org> added the comment:

* Frank Terbeck <bts at bts.grml.org> [20090613 11:55]:

> Holy smoke.

> I just looked at the code.

> Do we actually want this much code for a feature that's boiling in the
> bts for 1.5 years without anyone really getting it working?

> Also: I don't think the header makes much sense any more.

> We're using git.
> That means, we have *detailed* information about when a file what last
> changed.

ACK, and "Latest changes" causes headaches when merging stuff.
So I'm dropping this stuff out of every file which I'm updating anyway.

> That means, we _have_ *detailed* information about who changed a file.
> About who changed what _line_ and _when_ (git blame/annotate).

> I really think these headers make sense:

> Filename:
> maybe Purpose:. Maybe.
> Author: (And I think "grml-team (grml.org)" would suffice.)

Good idea, I hate the "who should we include into the Author field
overall" problem anyway. Let's use instead grml-team. Do we want to
use something like that? ->

Author(s):   grml team (http://grml.org/)

> Bug-Reports: maybe. And if, we should make sure the right URL is used.

http://grml.org/bugs/ is the right place IMO, because it provides
all the necessary information for users.

> License: GPL v2 (unless otherwise noted)

> Those headers don't need constant updating.

ACK

> I'm voting for "won't fix" here. Don't add redundant information
> without reason.

How to we want to proceed? Should we provide a good, ACK-ed template
in the grml-policy (which requires some action anyway as you're
aware ;))?

regards,
-mika-

----------
files: vimrc_grmlHeader
messages: 2150, 2155, 2290, 2292, 880
nosy: ft, mika, z3ttacht
priority: feature
status: chatting
title: integrate vimrc_grmlHeader

_____________________________________
GRML issue tracker <bts at bts.grml.org>
<http://bts.grml.org/grml/issue314>
_____________________________________