On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 7:33 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > > Which means it's the tools that expect reverse-chronological order that > must change. Either that, or people /that/ concerned about the > changelogs can simply switch to the git repos and use the existing git > tools to read their changelogs, as many (including me, as I regularly > check changelog entries, and now that I can, sometimes the actual diff, > on one or more packages at nearly every update) already are.
Setting aside the whole git-vs-rsync debate, I'd generally recommend that anybody interested in programmatic analysis of changes in the tree use git anyway, because there are far better ways to walk git commits/etc programatically than parsing changelogs. In python you can trivially iterate over commits, access the content of files, all the metadata, and so on. I'm not against devs doing the work to provide changelogs for those who prefer them, but I'd just go right to git if I were writing tools. -- Rich
