Re: Using VC for change descriptions

[Mike Gerwitz]

On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 13:28:44 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> Of course, git commit messages can be done poorly, just as ChangeLog files
> can be done poorly. Developers should use good practice in writing commit
> messages. Although a common approach is to use ChangeLog-style format in
> commit messages, they need less detail than traditional ChangeLog files
> since the version control system lets you easily go to the diff
> corresponding to the commit.

This is what I do with my projects now.  Guix and Emacs do this well
too, for example.  To Richard's point: while Git provides a wealth of
information and tools to process it, it sucks looking over diffs when
you want a high-level overview of what changed.

rms: Git does not provide tools to replace the type of ChangeLog entries
that you are describing.  But as Paul said, a combination of a good
commit message and a diff can make ChangeLog entries more concise.  With
that said, they can't be too concise, because users of a source
distribution don't have direct access to the repository.

I'm in favor of the hybrid approach (ChangeLog-style commit
message)---when looking through commits, you see the relevant ChangeLog
entry right there, rather than having to cross-reference with a separate
ChangeLog file.

-- 
Mike Gerwitz
Free Software Hacker+Activist | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer
GPG: D6E9 B930 028A 6C38 F43B  2388 FEF6 3574 5E6F 6D05
https://mikegerwitz.com

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature