Re: sim: replacing ChangeLog files with online git logs

[Andrew Burgess <andrew.burgess@embecosm.com>]

* Eli Zaretskii via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org> [2021-03-17 19:53:09 +0200]:

> > Cc: gdb@sourceware.org, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > From: Luis Machado <luis.machado@linaro.org>
> > Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:24:27 -0300
> > 
> > > Well, if that's what the majority here wants, then so be it.
> > 
> > That's what we should assess. From chatting with other active GDB 
> > developers, my feeling is that most of us want to drop the process of 
> > having to write ChangeLog entries manually. But we tend to keep quiet 
> > and carry on doing it.
> 
> I didn't start this discussion, mind you.
> 
> > > (The importance of having the list of modified symbols in the log is
> > > that then one doesn't need advanced Git commands to find out which
> > > changes modified a given function and why.)
> > > 
> > 
> > I understand the concern about git. I used to find git a bit too cryptic 
> > too, but using it daily has made that better.
> > 
> > Now git log/git blame shows very useful information when I'm looking for 
> > specific changes from a commit, and I rarely need to go through 
> > ChangeLogs other than to find commits that touched a particular 
> > function/variable.
> 
> IME "git log" and "git blame" have shortcomings when used for
> forensics, and having a ChangeLog-style list of changes helps overcome
> that in many important use cases.

Hi Eli,

I'd love to hear more about these many important use cases as this
might help me improve my workflow.  I can't recall ever referring to
the ChangeLogs to help track down a bug, so I'm worried I might be
missing out on some excellent techniques here.

I'm always keen to learn!

Thanks,
Andrew