From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0ECAD384B13C for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:09:36 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 0ECAD384B13C Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:37792) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lMXnj-00016w-J8; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:09:35 -0400 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:4238 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lMXnj-0002nu-8I; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:09:35 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 17:09:32 +0200 Message-Id: <83o8fhddg3.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Luis Machado Cc: vapier@gentoo.org, gdb@sourceware.org In-Reply-To: (message from Luis Machado on Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:52:03 -0300) Subject: Re: sim: replacing ChangeLog files with online git logs References: <83ft0zjys1.fsf@gnu.org> <83lfarhwjq.fsf@gnu.org> <83eegjhuuq.fsf@gnu.org> <8335wyj461.fsf@gnu.org> <83tup9disi.fsf@gnu.org> <2012fb21-38f2-3d1c-62c8-52d94d19e243@linaro.org> <83pmzxdegd.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL, SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gdb@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 15:09:37 -0000 > Cc: vapier@gentoo.org, gdb@sourceware.org > From: Luis Machado > Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 11:52:03 -0300 > > > That's the idea, yes. Of course, for such a generated ChangeLog to be > > useful, the Git commit log messages should be informative enough. > > I see. Given the ChangeLog will list all the files that were changed, I > suppose the commit messages would only need to describe what the changes > are about. But the description may not list function names, files, new > data structures etc. Would that work? > > Or did you have something more specific in mind? Ideally, the commit log messages should provide the same information as the manually managed ChangeLog files, in which case generating the files from Git log at release time doesn't lose any information. If some of that information is missing from the Git logs, then the generated ChangeLog files will be somewhat less useful. But if the project doesn't require to record more than that in Git log messages, then it's the problem with the Git logs, not with ChangeLogs. For example, in Emacs we ask contributors to format the Git log messages according to ChangeLog format, and then the generated ChangeLog file looks exactly like the manual one would.