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: Should we restore manually maintained ChangeLogs Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 21:57:59 +0200 Message-ID: <83d1r3o248.fsf@gnu.org> References: <56BE7E37.3090708@cs.ucla.edu> <4hd1rw1ubr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83vb50wxhv.fsf@gnu.org> <87y49vz4cg.fsf@acer.localhost.com> <87vb4zb0i4.fsf@gnu.org> <837fheuu6a.fsf@gnu.org> <83twkiteb3.fsf@gnu.org> <83lh5utbxb.fsf@gnu.org> <56DDD02A.20809@cs.ucla.edu> <83fuw2t2ue.fsf@gnu.org> <56DE0F6A.6010207@cs.ucla.edu> <83pov5rmt6.fsf@gnu.org> <56DFD78F.40205@cs.ucla.edu> <56E06093.7050509@cs.ucla.edu> <83twkfo7ij.fsf@gnu.org> <56E071AB.8050008@cs.ucla.edu> <83io0vo43x.fsf@gnu.org> <56E078DB.1020809@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457553511 8357 80.91.229.3 (9 Mar 2016 19:58:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 19:58:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 20:58:26 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 1adkFS-0003WL-87 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 20:58:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43854 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkFR-0003dz-Oi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 14:58:21 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59687) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkF0-0003a5-7L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 14:57:55 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkEx-0001QA-0I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 14:57:54 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:45660) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkEw-0001Q6-Tk; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 14:57:50 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4239 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1adkEt-0006z0-F3; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 14:57:50 -0500 In-reply-to: <56E078DB.1020809@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Wed, 9 Mar 2016 11:26:19 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:201309 Archived-At: > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 11:26:19 -0800 > > On 03/09/2016 11:14 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > This community is about software development, not about historical > > research. When I'm looking up a commit, I want accurate information > > about it. > > Like it or not, that is a form of historical research. No, it's a very far cry from historical research. > >> There is a reasonable question about how much of our development effort > >> should be devoted to sprucing up ChangeLogs after they're committed. I > >> think this should be low priority, whereas as I understand it you would > >> prefer that we boost its priority. Neither side is advocating > >> untrustworthy ChangeLogs, or perfect ChangeLogs for that matter; it's > >> mainly a question of where to allocate our scarce development resources. > > I'm arguing that we shouldn't _need_ to allocate resources to it. > > There is no free lunch here. No free lunch, but some lunches are cheaper than others. > There is a real cost to the old-fashioned approach of keeping commit > messages as files in the repository. This cost is borne by every > contributor, and the hassles of dealing with it was a primary > motivation for Emacs (and other projects) moving away from that > approach. That cost is much lower than any of the alternatives proposed so far, including the current arrangement with ChangeLog.2. It worked for years. If someone has a better proposal, let's hear it. > Regardless of the approach taken, there is also a cost to > sprucing up the historical record Since this is regardless of the approach, it shouldn't affect the decision in this matter.