Stefano Lattarini wrote: > Hello Gnulibers. > > Currently, the `gitlog-to-changelog' script clusters ChangeLog entries with > the same date together, placing them under a single "date line" in the > generated output. > > So we have something like this: > > > $ ./build-aux/gitlog-to-changelog -- -n 2 76d222b > > 2011-12-22 Jim Meyering <meyer...@redhat.com> > > correct previous ChangeLog entry: s/set -x/set -e/ > Spotted by Stefano Lattarini. > > init.sh: avoid unwarranted test failure when using "set -x" > * tests/init.sh (compare): Ignore nonzero exit from compare_dev_null_. > Otherwise, in a test script that uses "set -x" (like many in vc-dwim) > a use like "compare exp out" would get evoke an unconditional failure. > > > where I'd like to see something like this instead: > > $ ./build-aux/gitlog-to-changelog -- -n 2 76d222b > > 2011-12-22 Jim Meyering <meyer...@redhat.com> > > correct previous ChangeLog entry: s/set -x/set -e/ > Spotted by Stefano Lattarini. > > 2011-12-22 Jim Meyering <meyer...@redhat.com> > > init.sh: avoid unwarranted test failure when using "set -x" > * tests/init.sh (compare): Ignore nonzero exit from compare_dev_null_. > Otherwise, in a test script that uses "set -x" (like many in vc-dwim) > a use like "compare exp out" would get evoke an unconditional failure. > > This latter format would match the current practice used in the Automake > hand-maintained ChangeLog. > > Would you consider adding an option to gitlog-to-changelog to support such a > format?
Why? Solely for consistency, after you've made the switch from a manually-maintained to an automatically-generated ChangeLog file? Do you consider the duplication of the identical-date-name lines useful? The default format emitted by gitlog-to-changelog matches what emacs' changelog-mode does. That seems consistent with the "avoid duplication" philosophy and also tends to keep the ChangeLog file more compact.
