Re: ChangeLog entries

[phillip.lord@russet.org.uk (Phillip Lord)]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

> Currently, ChangeLog.2 has entries like this:
>
>   commit 45987b34535e5ae97fa14535630e283f34af94dd
>   Merge: c208eef feadec3
>   Author: Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr>
>   Date:   Sat Aug 8 21:54:45 2015 +0200
>
>       Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/fix/subsequence-error-with-negative-seq
>
>   commit feadec307da148af70cf87013c99771ca4db91e4
>   Author: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
>   Date:   Fri Aug 7 22:12:59 2015 +0100
>
>       Improve error signalling for seq-subseq.
>
>       The existing behaviour for seq-subseq is to error when indexes are too
>       large, but to silently ignore numbers which are too negative for lists.
>       String and vector handling errors in both cases. This has been
>       regularlised.
>
>       Error signalling behaviour has been explicitly added to the docstring of
>       seq-subseq, and also to cl-subseq which largely defers to
>       seq-subseq (and is therefore also impacted by this change).
>
>       Tests have been added for these exceptional cases, as well as one non
>       exceptional base case.
>
> I thought log entries from branches weren't supposed to end up in
> ChangeLog, but if they are, I think we should delete these.


They are both changes to trunk. feadec was a change *originally* made on
a branch, 45987 is a merge commit pulling feadec onto trunk also. I
wanted Nicolas to okay by change given that it was his code.

Personally, I would have rebased, but a rebase vs merge discussion is
unlikely to add anything substantial to the world.

I'd rather feadec wasn't deleted. It's my first ChangeLog entry and I'm
really rather proud of it, pathetic as that might sound.

Phil