|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: Is it time to drop ChangeLogs? |
Date: | Sun, 10 Jul 2016 02:04:55 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:47.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/47.0 |
On 07/09/2016 10:00 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
I do use "git annotate" at first, but it will only show the last commit that changed the code you are investigating, and I find this too frequently to be some reformatting or other similar cleanup that is not really what I want.
On the other hand, region-history will show you all commits that touched a given region. And you'll have to page through all of them if the interesting change happened long ago.
Then going back in history with "git annotate" is inconvenient, so "git log -L" is better.
I find `a' very convenient.
In any case, the startup times of 'annotate' and 'log -L' are comparable, and both are non-negligible.
Sure, but grepping through all NEWS or ChangeLog files doesn't happen instantly either.
This request is unreasonable. If nothing else, it will make the bar for contributing higher, not lower. The information is recorded in the bug discussion, and there's no need to reproduce it in the log message.We do encourage that, actually, though not require (bar for contributing, etc). This can be especially useful when the issue is not-to-complex, but the bug discussion is long. Mentioned near "rationale for a change" in CONTRIBUTE.Right, but this discussion is about the requirements, not about the stuff for which one gets extra bonus points.
The arguments started with "ChangeLogs take a long time to write", but somehow mutated into "committers don't put the information I'd want into the entries".
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |