Hi, Vincent Legoll <vincent.leg...@gmail.com> skribis:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:11 PM, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote: >> <https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Change-Log-Concepts.html> > > I read this and still am on the opposite side. > > The "changelog entries are like an undo list" is a WTF, to me this is what > `patch -R` is for... Not quite, because the change log shows the language-level view of the changes, which can be hard to infer by looking at a diff. It makes it easy to answer questions such as “when did we change this function?”, “when did we introduce that variable”, etc. > My take on that (the newbie wanting to grasp it) is that I do the following: > - read git changelog entries titles in gitk (or a ML, or a gitweb) > - if oneliner title looks interesting for a subject I'm currently > trying to learn > - I read the full changelog entry > - if that is still interesting me, then I go read the code I see. The commit title is definitely what you’re interested in here. I understand it can be frustratingly short, but then again it’s no substitute for the full discussions or code explanations, IMO. > Is there something equivalent with the GNU-styled CLs, that does not require > me to read every patch ? Because that's not scaling very well, especially in > languages that I'm not proficient in. > > My example is LKML, the changelogs are an extremely valuable tool to > understand > things, to debug, etc... I just love this level of details put into > changelogs. AIUI Linux-style commit logs are not change logs, but explanations. I still strongly believe that explanations believe in code. Ludo’.
