Re: [ft-devel] Re: Git and ChangeLogs

[Werner LEMBERG]

>> IMHO we should force everyone to commit *small* chunks, split into
>> easily readable code fragments.  This would help more than anything
>> else.
> 
> OK, then I think we should definitely make the ChangeLog format
> easier to generate and edit in case of conflicts (I don't think it's
> painless to merge), which would mean:

*Please* no!  The ChangeLog format is standardized -- Emacs has an
excellent mode just for editing it in a very convenient way.  Any
deviation from this format breaks zillions of utilities which rely on
it.

Either we have a ChangeLog file, or we haven't.  Given the great
visual possibilities of `gitk' I really don't mind if we drop it
completely in case it causes too much pain for you.

> A more complicated example would be to replace:
> 
> 2009-03-12  Werner Lemberg  <address@hidden>
> 
>     Fix some FreeType Coverity issues as reported for Ghostscript.
> 
>     * src/base/ftobjs.c (FT_New_Face, FT_New_Memory_Face): Initialize
>     `args.stream' (#3874, #3875).
>     (open_face_PS_from_sfnt_stream): Improve error management (#3786).
>     * src/base/ftmm.c (ft_face_get_mm_service): Fix check of `aservice'
>     (#3870).
> [...]

Not at all!  Each of those small issues should be a separate commit.
At the time I've applied this large chunk we were still using CVS.

> The fact that you spend a non-trivial amount of your time
> reformating and complementing it doesn't encourage me, and probably
> others, to do a better work here too :-)

Well, I maintain that I've found at least 10 errors (logical ones and
typos) in the last few years while doing that since it forced me to
*understand* the code.  This rate will probably decrease without a
ChangeLog file; on the other hand, `gitk' makes it very easy for
everyone to look at the changes.  One more reason to use only small
commits.


    Werner