git and changelogs

git and changelogs

[Andy Wingo]

Hi,

Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
changelogs on release, if that's a desire.

I can do something about the latter, if you all think it's a good idea.

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/

Re: git and changelogs

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:

> Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
> ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
> changelogs on release, if that's a desire.

I'd be tempted to do that, but among the many GNU projects that switched
to Git, apparently none of them did away with ChangeLogs, and I would
understand reluctance to remove them.

Simon Josefsson wrote `git2cl' (http://josefsson.org/git2cl/), which
could be helpful if we are to generate ChangeLogs upon release.

Thanks,
Ludovic.

Re: git and changelogs

[Han-Wen Nienhuys]

Ludovic Courtès escreveu:
>> Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
>> ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
>> changelogs on release, if that's a desire.
> 
> I'd be tempted to do that, but among the many GNU projects that switched
> to Git, apparently none of them did away with ChangeLogs, and I would
> understand reluctance to remove them.

LilyPond was the first project to switch to Git, and the ChangeLog was one
of the first things that we junked.

* It's a nuisance, because it always conflicts on merges.

* After you've used 

  git log -Ssuspect_text -p branch -- 

the ChangeLog looks like a joke.

* We did have some autogenerated changelogs for a while, but I have
never seen any evidence that they were used.

-- 
 Han-Wen Nienhuys - hanwen@xs4all.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

Re: git and changelogs

[Neil Jerram]

Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:

> Hi,
>
> Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
> ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
> changelogs on release, if that's a desire.

Do you mean that we would still have the same level of detail that we
currently put in ChangeLog, but we would put that in the commit
message instead?

Or do you mean that we'd have less formal detail (but possibly a
better overall explanation!)?

If the former, I'm worried that there isn't AFAIK anything as nice as
`C-x 4 a' for adding one detail of a change to a pending commit
message.  (Or is there?)

Regards,
     Neil

Re: git and changelogs

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> Do you mean that we would still have the same level of detail that we
> currently put in ChangeLog, but we would put that in the commit
> message instead?

Yes, AIUI.

> If the former, I'm worried that there isn't AFAIK anything as nice as
> `C-x 4 a' for adding one detail of a change to a pending commit
> message.  (Or is there?)

I use `git.el' that comes with Git, which definitely doesn't have
anything equivalent.  DVC might have something like this though.  Andy?

Thanks,
Ludovic.

Re: git and changelogs

[Andy Wingo]

Hi Neil,

On Sat 10 May 2008 00:41, Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
>> ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
>> changelogs on release, if that's a desire.
>
> Do you mean that we would still have the same level of detail that we
> currently put in ChangeLog, but we would put that in the commit
> message instead?

Yes, that's what I mean.

> I'm worried that there isn't AFAIK anything as nice as `C-x 4 a' for
> adding one detail of a change to a pending commit message.

Ludovic mentioned emacs' git.el, which I'm unfamiliar with. I use the
great DVC. I wrote about it here:

  http://wingolog.org/archives/2008/03/11/using-newfangled-version-control-systems-from-emacs

In short: there are excellent solutions. Unfortunately none of them are
bound to C-x 4 a. Fortunately C-x 4 a was always hard to type anyway.

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/

Re: git and changelogs

[Neil Jerram]

Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:

> Hi Neil,
>
> On Sat 10 May 2008 00:41, Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:
>
>> Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com> writes:
>>
>>> Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
>>> ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
>>> changelogs on release, if that's a desire.
>>
>> Do you mean that we would still have the same level of detail that we
>> currently put in ChangeLog, but we would put that in the commit
>> message instead?
>
> Yes, that's what I mean.

Cool.

>> I'm worried that there isn't AFAIK anything as nice as `C-x 4 a' for
>> adding one detail of a change to a pending commit message.
>
> Ludovic mentioned emacs' git.el, which I'm unfamiliar with.

I started using git.el, because I relied heavily on pcl-cvs with CVS,
and git.el says that it's pcl-cvs for Git.  But I found quickly that
the Git command set is just so rich that I don't need it; now I just
use Git commands in a shell.

> I use the
> great DVC. I wrote about it here:
>
>   http://wingolog.org/archives/2008/03/11/using-newfangled-version-control-systems-from-emacs

That looks just the job.

> In short: there are excellent solutions. Unfortunately none of them are
> bound to C-x 4 a. Fortunately C-x 4 a was always hard to type anyway.

Harder than `t', I'll agree.  Given this, I'm happy with your
suggestion to retire ChangeLog.  Perhaps you should add something to
HACKING about this, though?

Incidentally, I think I have to disagree with your:

> As an aside, I think people that like git do so out of a kind of
> software Stockholm syndrome: you have to learn so much about esoterics
> like refs, the object database, the index, etc. that you end up
> feeling empathy for git's idiosyncracies. Because objectively, git's
> working tree index should not be a concept that occupies space in my
> mind.

Git for me was a sizeable hiccup, but I think I got over that pretty
quickly, and now I'm loving it.  As far as the index is concerned: I
was bowled over by `git add -i', and I think that the concept of a
staging area is needed to do that.  If that's correct, I'm more than
happy to have a few brain cells devoted to the Git index.

Regards,
      Neil

Re: git and changelogs

[Andy Wingo]

Heya,

On Mon 12 May 2008 22:12, Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> I'm happy with your suggestion to retire ChangeLog. Perhaps you should
> add something to HACKING about this, though?

Sure, I can do that. I'll send something yall's way on Wednesday.

> I'm more than happy to have a few brain cells devoted to the Git
> index.

Sympathy for the oppressor!!! ;-)

I also have been using the index more and more lately. So I don't know
if you're in good company, but you're certainly in company :)

Cheers,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/

Re: git and changelogs

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

() Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>
() Fri, 09 May 2008 17:38:12 +0200

   Now that we've switched to git, hows about moving our changelogs to
   ChangeLog.old, and just using commit logs? We can still generate
   changelogs on release, if that's a desire.

There was discussion on Git + ChangeLog on the gnulib list about half a
year back.  I can't recall the outcome, but do remember one side effect
was that someone wrote a merge program specifically for ChangeLog files,
that could hook into Git somehow.

thi

Re: git and changelogs

[Neil Jerram]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 497 bytes --]

2008/5/22 Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>:
>
> There was discussion on Git + ChangeLog on the gnulib list about half a
> year back.  I can't recall the outcome, but do remember one side effect
> was that someone wrote a merge program specifically for ChangeLog files,
> that could hook into Git somehow.

Attached is my attempt (thus far) at such a program.  Comments
welcome, of course.  It would be good if we could reach a clear
decision on whether to abolish ChangeLogs, or not!

     Neil

[-- Attachment #2: commit-with-collated-logs.sh --]
[-- Type: application/x-sh, Size: 433 bytes --]

Re: git and changelogs

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hello!

"Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> 2008/5/22 Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>:
>>
>> There was discussion on Git + ChangeLog on the gnulib list about half a
>> year back.  I can't recall the outcome, but do remember one side effect
>> was that someone wrote a merge program specifically for ChangeLog files,
>> that could hook into Git somehow.
>
> Attached is my attempt (thus far) at such a program.  Comments
> welcome, of course.

IIUC, the idea is to fill in `ChangeLog' files as usual and then let
this program extract entries from there and put them in the Git log,
right?  That seems useful, but it means you can't use your favorite
front-end to commit.

> It would be good if we could reach a clear
> decision on whether to abolish ChangeLogs, or not!

I'd say "yes", but OTOH, I haven't found anything like Emacs'
`add-change-log-entry' that would fit nicely into my workflow (I did
look at DVC but it looks unmaintained and undocumented ATM).  IOW,
laziness has won so far.  :-)

Thanks,
Ludo'.

Re: git and changelogs

[Neil Jerram]

2008/7/15 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
> Hello!
>
> "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:
>>
>> Attached is my attempt (thus far) at such a program.  Comments
>> welcome, of course.
>
> IIUC, the idea is to fill in `ChangeLog' files as usual and then let
> this program extract entries from there and put them in the Git log,
> right?

Yes.

>  That seems useful, but it means you can't use your favorite
> front-end to commit.

Yes, that is a problem.

>> It would be good if we could reach a clear
>> decision on whether to abolish ChangeLogs, or not!
>
> I'd say "yes", but OTOH, I haven't found anything like Emacs'
> `add-change-log-entry' that would fit nicely into my workflow (I did
> look at DVC but it looks unmaintained and undocumented ATM).  IOW,
> laziness has won so far.  :-)

Agreed.  It is important to get a good workflow, and with the program
that I attached, it is inelegant that it does the "git commit" itself,
because it takes away flexibility in what args one might pass to "git
commit".

So more work is needed...  I wonder if adding code into one of Git's
hook might work?

Also I met Alfred Szmidt at the GNU hackers meeting in Bristol, and he
was working on a solution for Emacs - but I think that assumes doing
the commit from Emacs.

> Thanks,
> Ludo'.

Thanks for your thoughts!

      Neil

Re: git and changelogs

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

"Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> 2008/5/22 Thien-Thi Nguyen <ttn@gnuvola.org>:
>>
>> There was discussion on Git + ChangeLog on the gnulib list about half a
>> year back.  I can't recall the outcome, but do remember one side effect
>> was that someone wrote a merge program specifically for ChangeLog files,
>> that could hook into Git somehow.
>
> Attached is my attempt (thus far) at such a program.

BTW, Gnulib has two related scripts:

  http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=blob;f=modules/git-merge-changelog
  http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnulib.git;a=blob;f=modules/gitlog-to-changelog

The former is helpful when using good old `ChangeLog' files with Git,
while the latter is convenient when not using `ChangeLog' files.

Thanks,
Ludovic.

Re: git and changelogs

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

"Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> Attached is my attempt (thus far) at such a program.  Comments
> welcome, of course.  It would be good if we could reach a clear
> decision on whether to abolish ChangeLogs, or not!

Speaking of which, your latest commits did not include a ChangeLog
entry.  :-)

Thanks,
Ludovic.

Re: git and changelogs

[Neil Jerram]

2008/7/16 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
>
> Speaking of which, your latest commits did not include a ChangeLog
> entry.  :-)

Sorry, yes you're right.  I was anticipating the abolition of
ChangeLogs, but prematurely.

I've added the ChangeLogs in now, but I'm not sure I did the merge and
push correctly; can you take a look and advise?

What I did was:
1. Create 2 new commits in my own repo, with ChangeLogs for the two
previous commits.
2. git pull
This caused conflicts, because you had an intervening commit that
modified ChangeLog and libguile/ChangeLog.
3. Resolved those conflicts - in terms of the file contents.
4. git add ChangeLog libguile/ChangeLog
5. git merge
6. git push

Was that correct?

Thanks,
        Neil

Re: git and changelogs

[Neil Jerram]

2008/7/17 Neil Jerram <neiljerram@googlemail.com>:
> 2008/7/16 Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org>:
>>
>> Speaking of which, your latest commits did not include a ChangeLog
>> entry.  :-)
>
> Sorry, yes you're right.  I was anticipating the abolition of
> ChangeLogs, but prematurely.
>
> I've added the ChangeLogs in now, but I'm not sure I did the merge and
> push correctly; can you take a look and advise?
>
> What I did was:
> 1. Create 2 new commits in my own repo, with ChangeLogs for the two
> previous commits.
> 2. git pull
> This caused conflicts, because you had an intervening commit that
> modified ChangeLog and libguile/ChangeLog.
> 3. Resolved those conflicts - in terms of the file contents.
> 4. git add ChangeLog libguile/ChangeLog
> 5. git merge
> 6. git push
>
> Was that correct?

(That was on branch_release-1-8.  For master I did "git pull" first,
which appears to have avoided some trouble.)

       Neil

Re: git and changelogs

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

"Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> Sorry, yes you're right.  I was anticipating the abolition of
> ChangeLogs, but prematurely.

Eh.  ;-)  Eventually, at some point, we'll abolish them for real.

> I've added the ChangeLogs in now, but I'm not sure I did the merge and
> push correctly; can you take a look and advise?

That looks OK.

> What I did was:
> 1. Create 2 new commits in my own repo, with ChangeLogs for the two
> previous commits.
> 2. git pull
> This caused conflicts, because you had an intervening commit that
> modified ChangeLog and libguile/ChangeLog.
> 3. Resolved those conflicts - in terms of the file contents.
> 4. git add ChangeLog libguile/ChangeLog
> 5. git merge
> 6. git push

I'd have done a "git-commit -c ORIGINAL-COMMIT-ID" after step 4 and no
"git merge", but it looks like there's more than one way to do it.

Now, the issue with merges is that they make the history look more
complex than needed (see with gitk, for instance).  Thus, it's usually
best to write ChangeLog entries at the very last minute, after running
`git-pull'.  Another reason to abolish ChangeLogs...

Thanks,
Ludovic.