Re: git log -> changelog

[Gary V. Vaughan]

On 6 Sep 2010, at 12:47, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 05:20:30AM CEST:
>> On 6 Sep 2010, at 03:44, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>>> Except that the autotools project logs contain lots of S-O-B entries
>>> which explicitly do not have that particular meaning.  :-/
>> 
>> I suppose we can create an annotation for logs that have a non-compliant
>> SoB as if it was any other commit log typo we want to override to make
>> sure gitlog-to-changelog creates a beautiful ChangeLog -- after we document
>> our policy, and for entries going back to the beginning of the year in
>> which we decide to start using gitlog-to-changelog.
>> 
>> Even if we wait until next year to start using gitlog-to-changelog, I
>> think it worthwhile to know in advance how we will cope with a commit log
>> that needs a correction.
> 
> Definitely, yes.  I'm afraid I still don't quite understand the intended
> semantics though.  All S-O-B entries are to be co-authors of the patch,
> starting from, say, January 1, 2011?

As a start, yes.  We also need to come up with a way to annotate for
`(tiny change)', and to override typos without changing history.

And then we need to patch gitlog-to-changelog so that it produces correct
ChangeLog entries when it encounters those annotations.

> I wonder whether it makes sense to ask for a more consistent notation
> upstream, or push for one.  It'd be nice if gitk, cgit, and the like,
> could also display things as intended.

That would be very nice!

Before we can pursue any of that though, we might like to fiddle with
gitlog-to-changelog and add appropriate annotations to the 2010 Libtool
commits to ensure we can rebuild our current ChangeLog from the git
commit logs.

Really, I'm just throwing that all out there so it isn't forgotten... I
have plenty of unfinished patches backed up on the use-gnulib branch
already to be able to tackle anything else in earnest until a few weeks
after the release at the earliest.

Cheers,
-- 
Gary V. Vaughan (address@hidden)

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part