From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should we restore manually maintained ChangeLogs Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 18:04:54 +0200 Message-ID: <83fuvzprh5.fsf@gnu.org> References: <56BE7E37.3090708@cs.ucla.edu> <4hd1rw1ubr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83vb50wxhv.fsf@gnu.org> <87y49vz4cg.fsf@acer.localhost.com> <87vb4zb0i4.fsf@gnu.org> <837fheuu6a.fsf@gnu.org> <83twkiteb3.fsf@gnu.org> <83lh5utbxb.fsf@gnu.org> <56DDD02A.20809@cs.ucla.edu> <83fuw2t2ue.fsf@gnu.org> <56DE0F6A.6010207@cs.ucla.edu> <83pov5rmt6.fsf@gnu.org> <56DFD78F.40205@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457539519 21349 80.91.229.3 (9 Mar 2016 16:05:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 16:05:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mthl@gnu.org, johnw@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 17:05:14 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 1adgbh-0001Xb-2f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 17:05:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42317 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adgbg-0004sk-Ig for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 11:05:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37005) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adgbZ-0004rm-8E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 11:05:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adgbT-0004DI-MK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 11:04:57 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:40548) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adgbP-00049O-Vc; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 11:04:47 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3665 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1adgbK-0005Tc-MJ; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 11:04:43 -0500 In-reply-to: <56DFD78F.40205@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Tue, 8 Mar 2016 23:58:07 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:201249 Archived-At: > Cc: johnw@gnu.org, mthl@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 23:58:07 -0800 > > >> My own experience is otherwise. For the kinds of development I do, I rarely see ChangeLog screwups now, whereas I used to see them routinely. > > > > With or without git-merge-changelog? > > Without. Then I understand why your experience is so negative. > > Please describe the details of your proposal. > > For the more-traditional approach, apply the attached patch to emacs-25, and > merge it to master. Other branches can pick it up as needed. Didn't we consider this approach, and decided that having ChangeLog.2 was better?