On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 03:01:20PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote: > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:51 PM Segher Boessenkool > <seg...@kernel.crashing.org> wrote: > > If you rebase changelog files, then yes, it's a bloody pain ;-) > > So do you have a script that takes a commit with a ChangeLog at its end > and populates the appropriate ChangeLog files?
I develop my patches in Git, no changelog whatsoever. Then I "git format-patch" it. I write the changelog in that file (also proper white space, which "git commit" likes to destroy, I have a patch for that but not installed everywhere). "git send-email", wait for ack if necessary, "git am" and copy-and-paste the changelog parts, "git add" those changelog files, "git commit --amend", final sanity checks, and "git commit fsf master". I store the patch file to my archive, or I queue it for backport directly. > I'm trying to come up with > one to make the process less manual ... Yeah, don't look at me then :-) I *like* having most of those steps, most of this should only be done by people who are awake. > it's definitely a part that requires > more typing compared to svn. Instead of "git am" I had "patch -p1 <", distributing the changelog parts I just did in vi (as with git), then "svn ci", which pick up all modified files directly (sometimes an "svn add" first). It's pretty much the same for me. > ChangeLog file populating could be even > done on the server-side I guess (and not appropriately formatted logs > for the extraction/moving process rejected). Yup. As long as it's fool-proof, and we have some way to correct small disasters (both of those!) Segher
