ChangeLog love
Mike Alexander
mta at umich.edu
Thu May 16 15:35:39 EDT 2013
--On May 16, 2013 11:42:39 AM -0700 John Ralls <jralls at ceridwen.us>
wrote:
>> These questions are not criticisms, but really intended to stimulate
>> us to review or current ChangeLog process. Is it still ok or time
>> to improve ?
>
> I'll go further: It makes far more sense for release tarballs to just
> have a digest of important changes in NEWS. We might have to fiddle
> autogen.sh to not whine about ChangeLog if we delete it, but let's do
> it. The whole ChangeLog thing comes from a time long ago when version
> control systems didn't have good logging. ChangeLog was where commit
> messages went. It's totally redundant nowadays.
I like something between these two extremes. My personal model for the
best way to handle changelogs is BBEdit [1] from Barebones, although
doing it the way they do will take someone some time. They manually
list all significant changes in a release with a very short summary
(sometimes humorous) of each change. I don't know, but I suspect that
these are entered when someone checks in a change or closes a bug
report rather than all at once at release time. I like this because it
quickly tells me what's new and whether the bug that has been annoying
me is fixed.
Mike
[1] <http://www.barebones.com/support/bbedit/arch_bbedit1053.html>
More information about the gnucash-devel
mailing list