From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it time to drop ChangeLogs? Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 12:46:07 +0000 Message-ID: <20160707124606.GB4192@acm.fritz.box> References: <56BE7E37.3090708@cs.ucla.edu> <4hd1rw1ubr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83vb50wxhv.fsf@gnu.org> <87y49vz4cg.fsf@acer.localhost.com> <87twg2g86g.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467895632 16204 80.91.229.3 (7 Jul 2016 12:47:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 12:47:12 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 07 14:47:03 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 1bL8ho-0006BO-LP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 14:47:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39652 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL8hi-0002Ze-W0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 08:46:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49315) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL8gs-0002N9-0C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 08:46:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL8gn-0004va-0N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 08:46:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.muc.de ([193.149.48.3]:10938) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bL8gm-0004vM-M0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 08:45:56 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 34275 invoked by uid 3782); 7 Jul 2016 12:45:54 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p4FC468F2.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.196.104.242]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 14:45:52 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 4362 invoked by uid 1000); 7 Jul 2016 12:46:07 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87twg2g86g.fsf@lifelogs.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x X-Received-From: 193.149.48.3 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:205312 Archived-At: Hello, Ted. On Wed, Jul 06, 2016 at 10:20:07AM -0400, Ted Zlatanov wrote: > On Sun, 06 Mar 2016 13:52:04 -0800 John Wiegley wrote: [ .... ] > But Emacs doesn't have a pull request contribution system, which makes > it hard to review things before they go in, so contributors must know > and follow the right format at all times. It's a pain. > So I would suggest moving to a pull request system, where code review > from a second contributor is required to merge any non-trivial code > (exceptions should be granted based on years contributing to Emacs). > That also gives *everyone* the opportunity to comment on the code before > it's merged, instead of post-facto. Clearly services such as Github and > BitBucket and many others have been offering this functionality for a > while with good results. > A big advantage of pull requests is that they can group commits, so each > commit doesn't need the level of detail it does today, and so the > evolution of the work is visible to a reviewer. I don't know exactly what is meant by "pull request" and "pull request system". I don't think they are established terms. The term seems to imply that instead of a contributor pushing a change from his machine to a central repository, some specially authorised authority would pull the change from the contributor's machine. This would seem to imply every contributor needing to set up an scp daemon on his local machine, which doesn't feel like a Good Thing. Please explain "pull request\( system\)?" more precisely. Thanks! > Then ChangeLogs become simply documentation for the merged code, > together with actual docs and other notes that are needed. The pull > request system can later provide *everything* that a ChangeLog could, > and more (such as better searching and cross-referencing) so in the long > term the ChangeLog can go away. > Ted -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).