Re: [PATCH] Supporting git-merge-changelog

[Paul Hilfinger]

 > >> ChangeLogs were great because they are local and don't
 > >> need to reach the repository.  Using git this is no longer
 > >> a problem.
 > >>
 > >
 > > Not to be contrarian or anything (:->), but I'd be inclined to keep
 > > using ChangeLogs because they are so much more pleasant to use than
 > > git logs and their ilk.  I've never encountered the locality argument,
 > > in fact.  For me, the fact that a ChangeLog contains an easily
 > > searched change history AND allows the examination of individual
 > > changes without need for special tools, scripts, etc., makes it a
 > > pretty obvious technology for me.
 > 
 > I still browse the history, but instead of "less ChangeLog", I
 > use "git log" and voila! I'm already in less. 

Well, at last I understand why people like VC log files!  It would
NEVER have occurred to me to use 'less' for this purpose. For
reading, editing, and modifying a change log, I use Emacs, as I do
for all other files.

Another question occurs to me.  The ChangeLog is part of a source 
release, whether that be via VC system or tarball.  It would be a
shame to lose it when distributing releases as tarballs.  How would
you handle this?

Paul Hilfinger