ChangeLog.3 in master

ChangeLog.3 in master

[Paul Eggert]

I merged emacs-25 into master again today. This time, I attempted to 
cleanup the ChangeLog.2 mess in master, by creating a file ChangeLog.3 
(only in master) which attempts to keep log entries for the master 
branch. The emacs-25 branch does not have a ChangeLog.3 file. The master 
and emacs-25 branches should have identical ChangeLog.2 files 
immediately after merging emacs-25 into master, because there should be 
no reason to change ChangeLog.2 in master. (I hope this is all clear. :-)

Undoubtedly there will be further problems in this area, as the 
ChangeLog stuff is still way too awkward. I'm mildly inclined to stop 
updating ChangeLog files in the repository, and ask developers to use 
something like 'make ChangeLog' if they want more-recent entries. I 
realize not everyone agrees; on the other hand, ChangeLog.2 was becoming 
fairly confusing in the master branch and ChangeLog.3 is not that much 
better.

Re: ChangeLog.3 in master

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:01:51 -0800
> 
> I merged emacs-25 into master again today. This time, I attempted to 
> cleanup the ChangeLog.2 mess in master, by creating a file ChangeLog.3 
> (only in master) which attempts to keep log entries for the master 
> branch. The emacs-25 branch does not have a ChangeLog.3 file. The master 
> and emacs-25 branches should have identical ChangeLog.2 files 
> immediately after merging emacs-25 into master, because there should be 
> no reason to change ChangeLog.2 in master. (I hope this is all clear. :-)

It is, and thanks for doing this.

> Undoubtedly there will be further problems in this area, as the 
> ChangeLog stuff is still way too awkward. I'm mildly inclined to stop 
> updating ChangeLog files in the repository, and ask developers to use 
> something like 'make ChangeLog' if they want more-recent entries. I 
> realize not everyone agrees; on the other hand, ChangeLog.2 was becoming 
> fairly confusing in the master branch and ChangeLog.3 is not that much 
> better.

I took a look at ChangeLog.3, and I don't see anything terribly wrong
with it.  As time goes by, these generated ChangeLog files acquire
some duplications due to merges, but that's not a catastrophe, IMO.

As for updating the file in the repository, it really is necessary
when a release is tarred.  So perhaps we don't need to do this on
master, only on the release branch?

Re: ChangeLog.3 in master

[Paul Eggert]

On 12/08/2016 07:58 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> As for updating the file in the repository, it really is necessary
> when a release is tarred.  So perhaps we don't need to do this on
> master, only on the release branch?

That would simplify maintenance, yes. In that case, I suppose I should 
remove ChangeLog.3 in master? Its presence might tempt someone into 
trying to maintain it....

Re: ChangeLog.3 in master

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:18:00 -0800
> 
> On 12/08/2016 07:58 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > As for updating the file in the repository, it really is necessary
> > when a release is tarred.  So perhaps we don't need to do this on
> > master, only on the release branch?
> 
> That would simplify maintenance, yes. In that case, I suppose I should 
> remove ChangeLog.3 in master?

Yes, but let's wait for a couple of days to give others a chance to
comment on this.

Thanks.

P.S. If making a tarball from master (e.g., some GNU/Linux
distribution might want to do that) will require some extra steps due
to removal of the ChangeLog, we should probably update
admin/make-tarball.txt accordingly, when we remove the file.