[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Changelogs, really useful?

From: Deniz Dogan
Subject: Re: Changelogs, really useful?
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 20:17:05 +0200

2010/8/6 Richard Riley <>:
> Deniz Dogan <> writes:
>> 2010/8/6 Andrea Crotti <>:
>>> It's not really a question about emacs maybe (even if we can automate
>>> things) but more general about programming...
>>> I was wondering if it's still so useful to write detailed Changelogs.
>>> I mean all the software is under revision control, and doing small
>>> commits often I write a commit message for only one function, which
>>> would be exactly what I add in the changelog.
>>> I don't like to write things twice, and also history in the control
>>> revision system is much more detailed, does it really make sense to add
>>> changelogs?
>>> I think that only the changes that involve the architecture or how to
>>> use the software should be really important, but the default style on
>>> emacs is quite detailed.
>>> How do you manage?
>>> Write twice? Write only in the changelog/scm? Other?
>>> Thanks
>> I suspect it's nice to have a changelog as a file just to be able to
>> put it online or wherever people would find it useful. Not everyone
>> enjoys or knows how to see the bzr log.
>> Also, consider that the changelog file was introduced before bzr,
>> which meant that without it people would have to look in a CVS log.
>> (Those poor people!)
> Generate the changelog from the VCS in use when you Make the program.

Sometimes the changelog isn't the same as the commit message. The
changelog can be more vague in its description of what was changed
whereas the commit message may include many details.

Deniz Dogan

reply via email to

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