From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: git history tracking across renames (and emacs support) (Was: The name gnus-cloud.el) Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:22:04 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: References: <87374id7jy.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <877ett8g7k.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87a7yn7tqp.fsf@lifelogs.com> <878te75xa1.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87ind6l2tt.fsf@lifelogs.com> <877etklvsa.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83y3m0pv8u.fsf@gnu.org> <86608msw0h.fsf@dod.no> <838tdiet25.fsf@gnu.org> <87y3li4vh7.fsf@telefonica.net> <87efnan46u.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <86wp12qtgo.fsf@dod.no> <83tvw6chqv.fsf@gnu.org> <86shbprix7.fsf_-_@dod.no> <7c7503b4-1f82-8a25-fedd-c61c3e7629f6@cs.ucla.edu> <83zi5o6w4p.fsf@gnu.org> <745d2f02-8ca3-8962-0de4-053340c8fa63@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1515572429 21012 195.159.176.226 (10 Jan 2018 08:20:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:20:29 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 Cc: eliz@gnu.org, sb@dod.no, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 10 09:20:24 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eZBcR-0004mF-19 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 09:20:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53343 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZBeQ-0007mf-JC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 03:22:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57680) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZBeH-0007mV-8F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 03:22:14 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZBeG-0002iP-FK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 03:22:13 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:47252) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZBeA-0002VV-Sw; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 03:22:07 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0961D161618; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:22:06 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id r9DoSTWyXzWt; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:22:05 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DA25161610; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:22:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Ppq2ks-Gu1WG; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:22:05 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (unknown [47.154.30.119]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 18A7D16132F; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:22:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 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:221777 Archived-At: Richard Stallman wrote: > Description and explanation are two different issues. Please don't > treat them as the same -- if you do that, we are miscommunicating. I'm afraid that this miscommunication is endemic to the coding standards,= which=20 lump description and explanation together. For example, "Change Log Conce= pts"=20 currently starts like this (*emphasis* added): "You can think of the change log as a conceptual =E2=80=9Cundo list=E2=80= =9D which *explains*=20 how earlier versions were different from the current version. People can = see the=20 current version; they don=E2=80=99t need the change log to tell them what= is in it. What=20 they want from a change log is a clear *explanation* of how the earlier v= ersion=20 differed. Each entry in a change log *describes* either an individual cha= nge or=20 the smallest batch of changes that belong together ..." The above text uses "explains", "explanation", and "description" for the = same=20 thing, namely the change log entry. It is not at all clear from this text= that=20 the example change that I gave needs a description and not an explanation= . More generally, if a fact is obvious from the diff listing, the fact need= n't=20 appear in the change log entry (and this is true regardless of whether th= e fact=20 is described or explained). People who are curious about the fact can loo= k at=20 the diff listing and easily figure it out.