Re: Workflow to accumulate individual changes?

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>
> Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>, lekktu@gmail.com,
>         emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 15:43:57 +0200
> 
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 07:23:28 -0500, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> >> From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org>
> >> Cc: lekktu@gmail.com,  keramida@ceid.upatras.gr,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> >> Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:44:46 +0100
> >>
> >> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >>
> >> > Are you suggesting that the commit message should not mention the
> >> > changes in individual files at all, just the general idea?
> >>
> >> Yes, that's what they are for.
> >
> > But then the corresponding ChangeLog entries should have the text
> > identical or very similar to the commit message in front of them, or
> > else have some other means of locating the log entries easily.
> 
> I think it's very useful to see file changes in the ChangeLog.

The issue at hand is whether to have them in the commit messages, not
in ChangeLog.  ChangeLog entries always include file and function
information, it's been like that since day one.