From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11337 invoked by alias); 24 Jan 2020 21:45:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11291 invoked by uid 89); 24 Jan 2020 21:45:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=H*f:sk:df5a09c, H*MI:sk:df5a09c, H*i:sk:df5a09c X-HELO: us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (HELO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com) (205.139.110.61) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 21:45:45 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1579902341; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=F6c8SxSne1qP6FQYBUFBHuRTTlAq8AbDEld8SGv0YnI=; b=M6VCx1REtZmXmpwDIH7agU6G+9R9+si9Ef5JHI0fay+UnTdbzMG3jbL4QvEXV9DBXm99OF Ax1tQv6Jme2HVSRpAs/glkuGIcTFMq3UkksiBnrCcgjAq1qwHCnJkYwv5JNVsIxm82b9fb 1BXN//uO8n4v7n7c8aZeSMRyzoZqp9s= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-316-AdpAmRP9NcuIxPGsITSPoQ-1; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 16:45:38 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDC05DB61; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 21:45:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (ovpn-116-51.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.51]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42FB15DE5B; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 21:45:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 00OLjYVK018322; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 22:45:34 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 00OLjXw6018321; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 22:45:33 +0100 Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2020 09:31:00 -0000 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Jeff Law Cc: Eric Botcazou , gcc@gcc.gnu.org, David Edelsohn , Jason Merrill Subject: Re: Git ChangeLog policy for GCC Testsuite inquiry Message-ID: <20200124214533.GB17695@tucnak> Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <0829cb62791e9d8d034309f09b6c911ed8340c8b.camel@redhat.com> <1693150.uSzEE5ffML@polaris> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2020-01/txt/msg00453.txt.bz2 On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 02:36:31PM -0700, Jeff Law wrote: > On Fri, 2020-01-24 at 20:32 +0100, Eric Botcazou wrote: > > > I strongly prefer to move towards relying on the git log. > >=20 > > In my experience the output of git log is a total mess so cannot replac= e=20 > > ChangeLogs. But we can well decide to drop ChangeLog for the testsuite. > Well, glibc has moved to extracting them from git, building policies > and scripts around that. I'm pretty sure other significant projecs are > also extracting their ChangeLogs from git. >=20 > We could do the same, selecting some magic date as the cutover point > after which future ChangeLogs are extracted from GIT. In fact, that's > precisely what I'd like to see us do. We don't have a tool that can do it, not even get the boilerplate right. Yes, mklog helps, but it very often gets stuff wrong. Not to mention that the text what actually changed can't be generated very easily. Jakub