|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | bug#21998: Run 'make change-history' on release branch |
Date: | Sun, 6 Mar 2016 20:02:30 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 |
On 03/06/2016 11:47 AM, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen wrote:
I agree, and I think we should ditch the ChangeLogs. I think the ChangeLog "style" encourages less informative commit log messages. The normal, free-form commit style encourages people explaining, in their own words, why they do changes, and what they hope to achieve with them.
Whether it's "less" or "more", depends on what one is comparing to. I rather feel it establishes a quality baseline, and by being required to mention every change, you're encouraged to document them all at least somehow. And you can still prepend the whole thing with a free-form explanation, if it's needed.
So while the ChangeLog files can go, I'd rather we keep to that style in the commit messages. At least until we switch to some other well-defined standard.
The ChangeLog style, on the other hand, pretty much uselessly lists all files and functions affected, and after getting all that formalism in place, many people don't have more stamina left than to add "Fix bug". :-)
IME, except for trivial changes, writing a log entry takes comparatively little time compared to the rest (like designing and writing the code). Or maybe I'm just slow.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |