From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: ChangeLogs in the elpa branch Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:16 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87ipofdbka.fsf@gmx.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317056909 22399 80.91.229.12 (26 Sep 2011 17:08:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2011 17:08:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Michael Albinus , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 26 19:08:25 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R8EfJ-0000aS-OL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 19:08:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56825 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8EfJ-00050Y-8I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:36350) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8EfG-00050I-IG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8EfF-0008D6-H1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:22 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:60346) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R8EfE-0008Cr-86; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:20 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id p8QH8Gus006779; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:16 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 243C0B41D0; Mon, 26 Sep 2011 13:08:16 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Glenn Morris's message of "Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:26:53 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3992=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9286 : core <3992> : streams <685370> : uri <969138> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.20 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:144324 Archived-At: > Reasons I object to getting rid of ChangeLogs: > 1) Using Emacs VC, you only have to write the ChangeLog, then use C-c > C-a to insert it into the commit buffer. So there is no need to "write > the same thing twice". That doesn't seem like an objection but more like a reason why you're willing to live with the duplication. > 2) Sometimes I want to put more detail into the commit log, which is > not appropriate for the ChangeLog. Without stating why, I can't assess how serious this is. > 3) ChangeLogs can be edited to correct mistakes, commit logs cannot. That's not written in stone. CVS can edit its commit logs, and there's no reason the same can't be done for other revision control systems. Better yet: there's no reason we can't do it ourselves in a (potentially even backend-agnostic) way that will work for C-x v l and for auto-generation of a ChangeLog file. > 4) I have the impression that having to write ChangeLogs leads to > higher quality entries than just using commit logs would. I think this just reflects the better support in change-log-mode, with highlighting, C-x 4 a and things like that. We indeed need to improve the commit-log-editor accordingly. Stefan