From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Riley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Changelogs, really useful? Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:28:33 +0200 Organization: aich tea tea pea dicky riley dot net Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1281119361 29604 80.91.229.12 (6 Aug 2010 18:29:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 18:29:21 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 06 20:29:20 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OhRfU-0002Ae-05 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:29:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41260 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OhRfT-0003kP-9T for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:29:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44104 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OhRf3-0003jR-Am for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:28:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OhRf0-0007M5-R1 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:28:53 -0400 Original-Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:54908) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OhRf0-0007LK-Hh for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 14:28:50 -0400 Original-Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OhRex-0001sa-L2 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:28:47 +0200 Original-Received: from 85.183.18.158 ([85.183.18.158]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:28:47 +0200 Original-Received: from rileyrg by 85.183.18.158 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:28:47 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 47 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 85.183.18.158 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:74489 Archived-At: Deniz Dogan writes: > 2010/8/6 Richard Riley : >> Deniz Dogan writes: >> >>> 2010/8/6 Andrea Crotti : >>>> It's not really a question about emacs maybe (even if we can automate >>>> things) but more general about programming... >>>> >>>> I was wondering if it's still so useful to write detailed Changelogs. >>>> I mean all the software is under revision control, and doing small >>>> commits often I write a commit message for only one function, which >>>> would be exactly what I add in the changelog. >>>> >>>> I don't like to write things twice, and also history in the control >>>> revision system is much more detailed, does it really make sense to add >>>> changelogs? >>>> >>>> I think that only the changes that involve the architecture or how to >>>> use the software should be really important, but the default style on >>>> emacs is quite detailed. >>>> >>>> How do you manage? >>>> Write twice? Write only in the changelog/scm? Other? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>> >>> I suspect it's nice to have a changelog as a file just to be able to >>> put it online or wherever people would find it useful. Not everyone >>> enjoys or knows how to see the bzr log. >>> >>> Also, consider that the changelog file was introduced before bzr, >>> which meant that without it people would have to look in a CVS log. >>> (Those poor people!) >> >> Generate the changelog from the VCS in use when you Make the program. >> > > Sometimes the changelog isn't the same as the commit message. The > changelog can be more vague in its description of what was changed > whereas the commit message may include many details. Sure. I was just throwing it out there as a possibility in the discussion. It's quite common in git circles to do just that and people commit msg accordingly.