Jeremy White <jwhite(a)codeweavers.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]... Seems like a reasonable idea for a Friday afternoon I agree in general, but I believe that such information is required (in two different forms) in both places. (In this particular case what is in the cvs seems fine to me, but to a large extent we have Alexandre to thank for keeping that tidy). Here's my views The change log and cvs diff should explain why a change was made (and in an ideal world should refer to the supporting documentation e.g. bug numbers etc.). In this particular case it should mention, as it does, that the difference has been detected. The code should not contain change information. (I have worked on large code without the benefit of version control; it's revolting!). Comments in the code ought to reflect its current state, not how it got there. They should highlight important information that is not obvious (and what may be obvious to you may not be obvious to someone else or, more worryingly, may be obviously something else to them). Thus when two pieces of code look extremely similar but not identical it is worth a quick comment that the difference is deliberate, not the result of poor maintenance. (And I am a firm believer in doubly linked comments; e.g. one place contains the comment and the other refers to it). So what does anyone else think? Bill