Re: [PATCH] Supporting git-merge-changelog

[Denny Joel E]

On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Eric Blake wrote:

> This same debate already came up on the coreutils list.

> Personally, I _like_ the ChangeLog alongside the git log.

So far, the only GNU project I've found that doesn't keep ChangeLog is 
coreutils, but I've only looked at a handful.

> Not only can you
> correct typos in the changelog with a subsequent commit

This really appeals to me.  I make a lot of silly mistakes, and I hate not 
to be able to fix them, especially in the ChangeLog that will be included 
in a formal distribution.

The possibility of discrepancies between ChangeLog and git log are 
bothering me less the more I think about it.  There may be cases where the 
original git log entry contains a confusing error.  In those cases, it 
isn't prohibitively difficult for a developer to search for the same entry 
in ChangeLog where it may be corrected.  That search might be 
inconvenient, but I believe it would be infrequent, and it would be worse 
if there were no possibility to correct the entry anywhere.

Although cvs log is not as useful as git log, I did use it often when 
tracking down a change, and I don't recall discrepancies with ChangeLog 
causing difficulty.

> , but you can also
> attribute multiple authors (Jim already conceded that for coreutils, that was a
> shortcoming of his git-to-changelog script - how do you make the reconstructed
> ChangeLog credit multiple authors with copyright interest when git log only
> allows one --author per commit?).

Author information could just go in the log message in a standard format 
that a script could extract, so I don't see this as a reason to keep the 
ChangeLog.

> It is also possible to set up git hooks that
> will pre-populate your commit message with data culled from the current state
> of ChangeLog.

Do you have some hooks we can try?  This would at least help us keep our 
git log entries in a consistent format and free from copying errors.

> My final argument in favor of keeping the ChangeLog is Bruno's git-merge-
> changelog script.

Akim, I'm leaning toward keeping ChangeLog for now.  If you find that 
git-merge-changelog does not solve the difficulties with merging, perhaps 
we can revisit the issue again later.  Does that sound reasonable?

> And bison is
> already set up to use git-merge-changelog, provided that you install it per
> directions in HACKING.

That reminds me: those instructions should be more helpful.  The Autoconf 
README-hacking has a better URL at least.