* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
[not found] ` <E1ZMbYa-0003UO-69@vcs.savannah.gnu.org>
@ 2015-08-04 15:30 ` Glenn Morris
2015-08-04 15:52 ` David Kastrup
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Glenn Morris @ 2015-08-04 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel; +Cc: David Kastrup
David Kastrup wrote:
> branch: master
> commit 5022e27dac4c13651941e425dbec5b3a2cecdae4
> Author: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
> Commit: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>
> ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
Surely this change deserved to create a ChangeLog entry, rather than
being marked with "; " to exclude that.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
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
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Kastrup @ 2015-08-04 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: emacs-devel
Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:
> David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> branch: master
>> commit 5022e27dac4c13651941e425dbec5b3a2cecdae4
>> Author: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>> Commit: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>>
>> ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
>
> Surely this change deserved to create a ChangeLog entry, rather than
> being marked with "; " to exclude that.
It's a sort of a janitorial potential bug fix for symptoms nobody
complained about yet, distributed around dozens of files and disparate
functions in various parts of Emacs. I've posted the patch more than a
week ago on emacs-devel. No comment. I put out a reminder yesterday
that I was going to push this patch. No comment.
A ChangeLog entry would run over several dozens of lines and take the
better part of an hour to create since C-x v a does not work with Git.
I figured that nobody would even notice anyway.
What do you propose I do now?
--
David Kastrup
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-04 15:52 ` David Kastrup
@ 2015-08-08 8:33 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 9:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-08-08 14:17 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Kastrup @ 2015-08-08 8:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Glenn Morris; +Cc: emacs-devel
David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
> Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> branch: master
>>> commit 5022e27dac4c13651941e425dbec5b3a2cecdae4
>>> Author: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>>> Commit: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
>>>
>>> ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
>>
>> Surely this change deserved to create a ChangeLog entry, rather than
>> being marked with "; " to exclude that.
>
> It's a sort of a janitorial potential bug fix for symptoms nobody
> complained about yet, distributed around dozens of files and disparate
> functions in various parts of Emacs. I've posted the patch more than a
> week ago on emacs-devel. No comment. I put out a reminder yesterday
> that I was going to push this patch. No comment.
>
> A ChangeLog entry would run over several dozens of lines and take the
> better part of an hour to create since C-x v a does not work with Git.
> I figured that nobody would even notice anyway.
>
> What do you propose I do now?
That question was not rhetorical. I admit that the leadup may not have
been the best incentive for answering it. Sorry for that. What I was
saying was that my own judgment was that the next consistent option
would have been a significant investment of effort that I saw no
compelling justification for, so I shopped for other opinions without
result.
You disagree, but I don't see your take on "next consistent option".
I am not opposed to investing a significant additional amount of time
for meeting a reasonable project objective. But I don't want to waste
that time based on guesswork that might end wide off the mark.
--
David Kastrup
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-08 8:33 ` David Kastrup
@ 2015-08-08 9:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
2015-08-08 9:38 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 14:17 ` Stefan Monnier
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-08-08 9:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Kastrup; +Cc: rgm, emacs-devel
> 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.
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.
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.
HTH
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-08 9:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2015-08-08 9:38 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 10:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Kastrup @ 2015-08-08 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Eli Zaretskii; +Cc: rgm, emacs-devel
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
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-08 9:38 ` David Kastrup
@ 2015-08-08 10:18 ` Eli Zaretskii
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Eli Zaretskii @ 2015-08-08 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Kastrup; +Cc: rgm, emacs-devel
> From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
> Cc: rgm@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2015 11:38:32 +0200
>
> Well, the question is just what this entry should entail. Every changed
> function and file?
Yes.
> That will be a rather large entry.
It's not a problem. We have our share of such large entries already.
> 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.
Right.
> Well, the changes are mostly of the "similar minor change" kind, namely
> not completely obeying the same description.
Nevertheless, I think it should be possible to come up with some text
that would allow you to have a single entry for all of those changes.
> 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 think our rule is to have ChangeLog entries for all non-trivial
changes whose description carries significant information. Basically,
anything that people might want looking up in order to understand why
was the change done. I think your changes qualify.
> 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.
Something like this:
* file1 (func1, func2, func3):
* file2 (func4, func5):
* file3 (func6, func7, func8, func9): Minor improvements in how
events are added to unread-command-events.
shouldn't make things worse, and should be fairly easy to write, I
think.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-08 8:33 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 9:11 ` Eli Zaretskii
@ 2015-08-08 14:17 ` Stefan Monnier
2015-08-08 15:04 ` David Kastrup
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2015-08-08 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Kastrup; +Cc: Glenn Morris, emacs-devel
>>> Surely this change deserved to create a ChangeLog entry, rather than
>>> being marked with "; " to exclude that.
>> A ChangeLog entry would run over several dozens of lines and take the
>> better part of an hour to create since C-x v a does not work with Git.
>> I figured that nobody would even notice anyway.
I think what Glenn said, was that the entry should not have started with
";". That would have generated a sub-optimal ChangeLog entry, but
that's better than no ChangeLog entry.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-08 14:17 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2015-08-08 15:04 ` David Kastrup
2015-08-08 16:08 ` David Kastrup
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Kastrup @ 2015-08-08 15:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Glenn Morris, emacs-devel
Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>>>> Surely this change deserved to create a ChangeLog entry, rather than
>>>> being marked with "; " to exclude that.
>>> A ChangeLog entry would run over several dozens of lines and take the
>>> better part of an hour to create since C-x v a does not work with Git.
>>> I figured that nobody would even notice anyway.
>
> I think what Glenn said, was that the entry should not have started
> with ";". That would have generated a sub-optimal ChangeLog entry,
> but that's better than no ChangeLog entry.
Let me make very clear that I looked at CONTRIBUTE first and finally
went by
- Start with a single unindented summary line explaining the change;
do not end this line with a period. If that line starts with a
semi-colon and a space "; ", the log message will be ignored when
generating the ChangeLog file. Use this for minor commits that do
not need separate ChangeLog entries, such as changes in etc/NEWS.
since the only listed alternative was a full GNU-style ChangeLog commit
message. Without looking at CONTRIBUTE, I would have written up a
commit message like I do on other projects, _not_ listing every filename
and function name (which are listed in the accompanying context diff
"git log -p" produces). That would have been little work and would have
made every bit of information readily accessible that one would want.
I was not sure that the ChengeLog-entry free variant was really the best
choice. That's one of the reason I posted the patch for comment on the
Emacs-devel list.
I'll prepare a ChangeLog entry like Eli described and commit it.
I really cannot imagine that it will be useful ever to anybody as the
collection of function names and affected files is a rather random
assortment (I could not name a single one in spite of creating the
patch). So I skipped out on work I could not imagine anyone to want.
I was wrong on that but in my defense I did solicit for feedback.
--
David Kastrup
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: master 5022e27: ; Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
2015-08-08 15:04 ` David Kastrup
@ 2015-08-08 16:08 ` David Kastrup
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: David Kastrup @ 2015-08-08 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Glenn Morris, emacs-devel
David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
> Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> writes:
>
>>>>> Surely this change deserved to create a ChangeLog entry, rather than
>>>>> being marked with "; " to exclude that.
>>>> A ChangeLog entry would run over several dozens of lines and take the
>>>> better part of an hour to create since C-x v a does not work with Git.
>>>> I figured that nobody would even notice anyway.
>>
>> I think what Glenn said, was that the entry should not have started
>> with ";". That would have generated a sub-optimal ChangeLog entry,
>> but that's better than no ChangeLog entry.
>
> Let me make very clear that I looked at CONTRIBUTE first and finally
> went by
>
> - Start with a single unindented summary line explaining the change;
> do not end this line with a period. If that line starts with a
> semi-colon and a space "; ", the log message will be ignored when
> generating the ChangeLog file. Use this for minor commits that do
> not need separate ChangeLog entries, such as changes in etc/NEWS.
>
> since the only listed alternative was a full GNU-style ChangeLog commit
> message. Without looking at CONTRIBUTE, I would have written up a
> commit message like I do on other projects, _not_ listing every filename
> and function name (which are listed in the accompanying context diff
> "git log -p" produces). That would have been little work and would have
> made every bit of information readily accessible that one would want.
>
> I was not sure that the ChengeLog-entry free variant was really the best
> choice. That's one of the reason I posted the patch for comment on the
> Emacs-devel list.
>
> I'll prepare a ChangeLog entry like Eli described and commit it.
> I really cannot imagine that it will be useful ever to anybody as the
> collection of function names and affected files is a rather random
> assortment (I could not name a single one in spite of creating the
> patch). So I skipped out on work I could not imagine anyone to want.
> I was wrong on that but in my defense I did solicit for feedback.
Committed. I should be very much surprised if this will ever prove
useful to anybody. But at least it should close this discussion.
2015-08-04 David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Do not overwrite preexisting contents of unread-command-events
* lisp/vc/emerge.el (emerge-show-file-name):
* lisp/progmodes/vhdl-mode.el (vhdl-electric-dash)
(vhdl-comment-insert, vhdl-hooked-abbrev):
* lisp/progmodes/octave.el (inferior-octave-dynamic-list-input-ring):
* lisp/progmodes/fortran.el (fortran-window-create-momentarily):
* lisp/progmodes/ebrowse.el (ebrowse-hack-electric-buffer-menu):
* lisp/progmodes/cperl-mode.el (cperl-putback-char):
* lisp/obsolete/vip.el (vip-escape-to-emacs)
(vip-prefix-arg-value, vip-prefix-arg-com):
* lisp/obsolete/terminal.el (te-escape-extended-command-unread):
* lisp/leim/quail/tibetan.el (quail-tibetan-update-translation)
(quail-tibkey-update-translation):
* lisp/leim/quail/lrt.el (quail-lrt-update-translation):
* lisp/leim/quail/lao.el (quail-lao-update-translation):
* lisp/leim/quail/japanese.el (quail-japanese-update-translation)
(quail-japanese-self-insert-and-switch-to-alpha):
* lisp/leim/quail/hangul.el (hangul2-input-method)
(hangul3-input-method, hangul390-input-method):
* lisp/language/hanja-util.el (hangul-to-hanja-char):
* lisp/international/robin.el (robin-input-method):
* lisp/international/quail.el (quail-start-translation)
(quail-start-conversion):
* lisp/gnus/gnus-art.el (gnus-article-describe-key)
(gnus-article-describe-key-briefly):
* lisp/eshell/em-hist.el (eshell-list-history):
* lisp/term.el (term-dynamic-list-input-ring)
(term-dynamic-list-completions):
* lisp/subr.el (momentary-string-display):
* lisp/simple.el (read-quoted-char):
* lisp/pcomplete.el (pcomplete-show-completions):
* lisp/kmacro.el (kmacro-repeat-on-last-key):
* lisp/info.el (Info-summary):
* lisp/ehelp.el (electric-help-command-loop):
* lisp/ebuff-menu.el (electric-buffer-list)
(Electric-buffer-menu-exit):
* lisp/double.el (double-translate-key):
* lisp/comint.el (comint-dynamic-list-input-ring)
(comint-dynamic-list-completions): Do not overwrite preexisting
contents of `unread-command-events' when putting new events into
it.
--
David Kastrup
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-08-08 16:08 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[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
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
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).