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: make change-history on non-master branches Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:38:32 +0200 Message-ID: <83wptd7mif.fsf@gnu.org> References: <831tbqc4pc.fsf@gnu.org> <9ta8qb5gcc.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83egfn9nmp.fsf@gnu.org> <83bnar9mcd.fsf@gnu.org> <83r3jm7zw1.fsf@gnu.org> <87lh9tkby8.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1447965546 25554 80.91.229.3 (19 Nov 2015 20:39:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: schwab@suse.de, eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org To: David Engster Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 19 21:38:58 2015 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 1ZzVyr-0004zF-1G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:38:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43936 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzVyq-0004mT-C0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:38:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45560) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzVym-0004jd-A6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:38:53 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzVyi-000236-S5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:38:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout27.012.net.il ([80.179.55.183]:60836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZzVyi-00022D-KE; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:38:48 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout27.012.net.il by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NY200300WT8RH00@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:33:46 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NY200KRIX4AGJ80@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Thu, 19 Nov 2015 22:33:46 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87lh9tkby8.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.183 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:194821 Archived-At: > From: David Engster > Cc: Andreas Schwab , rgm@gnu.org, eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:48:15 +0100 > > For further ChangeLog updates, at least in the current form, I don't see > how to automate this. IMHO, for automatic merges, we would need the > following: > > - Generating the ChangeLog on the 'master' branch ignores commits from > emacs-25 merges. > > - Generating the ChangeLog on the 'emacs-25' branch ignores cherry-picks > from 'master' (can be detected by git or through a magic word in the > commit message). > > - when cherry-picking from 'master', we copy the generated&fixed > ChangeLog entry and commit it separately. Then gitmerge.el could skip > that during the merge into master, just like it skips the backported > commit itself. I'm not sure I understand the practical meaning of the last item (which AFAIU is the only one that needs to be done by humans). You seem to say that each cherry-pick should require an update to ChangeLog.2 both on master and on emacs-25, and application of fixes to them? Normally, ChangeLog.2 is updated once a week from Git, and then whoever has a habit of looking at the results makes corrections there when they feel like it. So there's no guarantee that the corrected entry is in place when you cherry-pick. Moreover, the person who cherry-picks does not necessarily know whether the log message of the cherry-picked commit needs fixing, or how to fix it. Or maybe I misunderstood the proposal. Thanks.