From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ChangeLog? Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:12:55 -0500 Message-ID: References: <61k6osjqsz.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1109686655 26019 80.91.229.2 (1 Mar 2005 14:17:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:17:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: snogglethorpe@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, miles@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 01 15:17:34 2005 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D68Bb-0007uC-Og for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:17:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D68UB-0006hh-3C for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:36:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D68T6-0006Pz-AP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:35:24 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1D68Sq-0006Jb-T2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:35:15 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1D68Sn-0006Gl-2w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:35:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [132.204.24.67] (helo=mercure.iro.umontreal.ca) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1D687P-0000MT-TW; Tue, 01 Mar 2005 09:13:00 -0500 Original-Received: from hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.50]) by mercure.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CC50340006; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:12:59 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from asado.iro.umontreal.ca (asado.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.24.84]) by hidalgo.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0BC82CC002; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:12:55 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: by asado.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 751274BB80; Tue, 1 Mar 2005 09:12:55 -0500 (EST) Original-To: bob@rattlesnake.com In-Reply-To: (Robert J. Chassell's message of "Tue, 1 Mar 2005 13:29:31 +0000 (UTC)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-DIRO-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-DIRO-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-DIRO-MailScanner-SpamCheck: n'est pas un polluriel, SpamAssassin (score=-4.813, requis 5, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.09, BAYES_00 -4.90) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-MailScanner-To: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:33976 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:33976 > When you use a version control system that provides a per-file > log, you should use @strong{both} the the per-file log and the > more general @file{ChangeLog}. This is because it is inconvenient > or impossible for someone using a different version control system > to access another version control system's per-file log. This > policy is different from the past, when you recorded small changes > in the per-file log only. > Typically you want to write just one entry for each change. You > can write the entry in @file{ChangeLog}, using the @kbd{C-x 4 a} > command (@pxref{Change Log}), and then copy it to the log buffer > when you check in the change. Or you can write the entry in the > log buffer while checking in the change, using the @kbd{C-x v v} > command, and later use the @kbd{C-x v a} command to copy it to the > more general @file{ChangeLog} (@pxref{Change Logs and VC}). This is all highly dependent on the specific situation. E.g. it depends on the revision control system in use and lots of other things. E.g. many revision control systems provide special facilities to automatically maintain an explicit changelog-like file (even RCS and CVS provide something like that with their $Log$ keyword). Depending on the specific circumstance it can be preferable to use a manually managed ChangeLog file (this is usually the case with RCS and CVS, AFAIK), but with systems like Subversion and Arch it's usually not worth the trouble. Stefan