[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Should we restore manually maintained ChangeLogs

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: Should we restore manually maintained ChangeLogs
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 08:41:38 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0

On 03/09/2016 10:55 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Your opinion on this needs to be taken with a grain of salt, since you never tried to install git-merge-changelog. Without it, I agree with you that ChangeLog merge conflicts are very irritating. But that's exactly why git-merge-changelog was written.

This doesn't address the point that the old system had real problems even when I wasn't doing merges (which is my normal mode of operation). And Dmitry reported problems even when using git-merge-changelog.

It's not low-priority work when I need an accurate accord of what happened. Then it's very high priority for me.

When I want an accurate record of what happened, I want to see what was actually committed, warts and all. If people start using git-replace to change old commit messages, I'll probably start using --no-replace-objects to see what the original commit looked like. I realize your style differs. Still, it's not clear that it's worth inflicting significant pain on other developers in order to support that style.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]