From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: rgm@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2015 11:38:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fv3ui0h3.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <838u9mqh4t.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 08 Aug 2015 12:11:30 +0300")
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>> Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2015 10:33:17 +0200
>> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
>>
>> > What do you propose I do now?
>>
>> That question was not rhetorical.
>
> It's unclear to me what exactly were you asking. If the question is
> how to fix that single ChangeLog entry, then the answer is: wait for
> the update to ChangeLog.2 to be committed (happens once a week, I
> think), and then manually correct (add in your case) the problematic
> entry, and commit the result.
Well, the question is just what this entry should entail. Every changed
function and file? That will be a rather large entry.
Apart from that I don't think I need to "wait for the update to
ChangeLog.2" since the complaint was that the log message was formatted
in a way where it would not even cause an entry to ChangeLog.2. So it
doesn't really seem to matter all that much just when I'll update
ChangeLog.2 manually.
> If you are asking about future log entries, then here's what I do: I
> keep a local ChangeLog file, which is unversioned. I use the normal
> "C-x 4 a" command to write a ChangeLog entry, and then I copy it to
> the log message when I commit the changeset.
After unindenting and reformatting, yeah. Which is a total crutch. But
it's not like I haven't done it for years just like that. I just
pointed out that this will lead to a very large ChangeLog entry here.
> If the question is how to format the log entry for the particular
> changeset you committed in 5022e27dac4c13651941e425dbec5b3a2cecdae4,
> then after looking through it I see no problem to just mention every
> function where you made the changes. It sounds like most of them
> replace setq with a push, or do similar minor changes, which is fine
> to mention in the log entry.
Well, the changes are mostly of the "similar minor change" kind, namely
not completely obeying the same description.
The main problem I have is that the invested work and the resulting
space in the ChangeLog is not going to save anybody any time or effort
since we are not talking about a feature here or normally user-visible
changes in semantics. And it's not particular to any package/feature
either. It's not the kind of change we are maintaining a ChangeLog file
separate from commit messages for.
I can invest the time necessary for creating this dump half-manually if
desired. I just have a trouble figuring out any reason why it would be
desired. If we had an automated way of creating such a change log entry
generating commit message, it would waste less of the _writer's_ time.
But I can't help the feeling that in this case I'm also only wasting
_readers'_ time.
The reason I made that simple commit message really wasn't "oh, I'm too
lazy to do a proper one" but rather "this would not even make sense".
Obviously other developers disagree after the fact so I'll "fix" it. I
just have a hard time doing a fix that does not feel like making the
situation worse than it is already.
--
David Kastrup
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-08 9:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20150804124300.13374.78396@vcs.savannah.gnu.org>
[not found] ` <E1ZMbYa-0003UO-69@vcs.savannah.gnu.org>
2015-08-04 15:30 ` master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events Glenn Morris
2015-08-04 15:52 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 8:33 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 9:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-08-08 9:38 ` David Kastrup [this message]
2015-08-08 10:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-08-08 14:17 ` Stefan Monnier
2015-08-08 15:04 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 16:08 ` David Kastrup
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87fv3ui0h3.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org \
--to=dak@gnu.org \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=rgm@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).