From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it time to drop ChangeLogs? Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 21:36:35 +0000 Message-ID: <20160308213635.GE6269@acm.fritz.box> References: <64a52598-ad53-498c-993c-67d7827dbdfc@default> <838u1uuuau.fsf@gnu.org> <878u1um2xl.fsf@thinkpad.rath.org> <87fuw090k7.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83y49spuxt.fsf@gnu.org> <87pov4achc.fsf@acer.localhost.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457472888 984 80.91.229.3 (8 Mar 2016 21:34:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 21:34:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D3scar?= Fuentes , Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ingo Lohmar Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 08 22:34:33 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1adPGy-0006YB-Sc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 22:34:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37606 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adPGt-0001D1-90 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:34:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36278) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adPGX-0001Az-Vb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:34:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adPGS-00017B-Ve for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:34:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.muc.de ([193.149.48.3]:10769) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adPGS-00016j-LO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 16:34:00 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 3363 invoked by uid 3782); 8 Mar 2016 21:34:00 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p548A5689.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.138.86.137]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 22:33:57 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 6942 invoked by uid 1000); 8 Mar 2016 21:36:35 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87pov4achc.fsf@acer.localhost.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x X-Received-From: 193.149.48.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:201214 Archived-At: Hello, Ingo. On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 10:25:35PM +0100, Ingo Lohmar wrote: > On Tue, Mar 08 2016 22:37 (+0200), Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Using Git is not a problem for me. The problem is that the > > information in Git log is unreliable. The other problem is that will > > never succeed in teaching new contributors how to make good log > > messages unless we have an easy way of fixing mistakes there. > Some arguments in this thread are repeated ad infinitum although they > don't seem to stand a little scrutiny. "git log" messages cannot > technically be both immutable and unreliable: At least there is some > severely imprecise use of language going on. If a git log message starts off life unreliable (i.e. there are mistakes in it) it can never be corrected. It stays unreliable for the lifetime of the repository. > As to the teaching argument: I have read every single message in this > thread, and nobody has argued for lower (but several people for higher) > commit message standards. > In contrast to your opinion, it seems to me that fixing mistakes in the > Changelogs teaches a contributor who has committed with a flawed commit > message that it's not really important. They, or somebody else, can > clean up their (incl. possibly my) mess. As Oscar has argued, having > the original commit rejected (by means to be discussed, and only until > people have shown good judgment and discipline) teaches them that commit > messages matter. I am an experienced Emacs contributor, and I have, even recently, made mistakes in my commit messages. I resent the fact that it is so difficult to correct them, even before pushing to savannah. I don't think I need any teaching on the importance of good commit messages. > The whole argument for Changelogs comes down to a) being an established > band-aid to clean up spilt milk, or b) providing a fixed-form summary of > things that can be obtained using the VCS (provided the humans or tools > wirting the Changelog are as "reliable" as the VCS). Not everybody has access to the git repository, and not everybody who has is capable of using it effectively. ChangeLogs remain a useful, easy to use summary of Emacs's progress. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).