On May 16, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Mike Alexander <m...@umich.edu> wrote:
> --On May 16, 2013 11:42:39 AM -0700 John Ralls <jra...@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> That looks like a digest: It's missing all of the "oops" commits that show up in a raw log. I usually do something similar in NEWS when I do a release, except that I separate design changes and bug fixes into separate sections. That follows a pattern of NEWS files I found when I started doing releases last year. Regards, John Ralls _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
