Janne Blomqvist <blomqvist.ja...@gmail.com>:
> My secret desire is that once we get this done we would drop these
> silly ChangeLogs. Although I'm not a kernel developer, I kind of like
> the Linux kernel style, where the commit msg contains a reasonably
> in-depth motivation for the change, sort of like the email message one
> sends to gcc-patches when introducing a patch (in fact, if one uses
> git format-patch + git send-email this kind of workflow is supported
> out-of-the-box). I find that a lot more useful than a screenful of
> "Likewise". YMMV.
I strongly endorse this position.
Janne is correct to point out that git is designed to be used in a
patch-centric workflow with a specific style of commenting - summary
line, plus optional separator and running text. This is expressed
especially in the UI design of git log and gitk.
ChangeLogs are a relic from the days before version-control systems with
real changesets. When you have real changesets, all ChangeLogs do is
add unnecessary process friction.
You guys will and should make your own project policy, but from
watching lots of transitions I will tell you that I think the sooner
you switch over to the Git style of commenting the better for everybody.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
My work is funded by the Internet Civil Engineering Institute: https://icei.org
Please visit their site and donate: the civilization you save might be your own.
