Re: On autogenerated ChangeLog
- From: Pat Suwalski <pat suwalski net>
- To: Tristan Van Berkom <tvb gnome org>
- Cc: gnome-infrastructure <gnome-infrastructure gnome org>, Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>, "Zeeshan Ali \(Khattak\)" <zeenix gmail com>, desktop-devel-list <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: On autogenerated ChangeLog
- Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 16:56:23 -0400
Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
Sure,
on the other hand projects with ChangeLogs that are hand-tended
to are, in my personal experience richer than logs of arbitrary commits,
if only by the simple virtue of forcing you to spend time caring for it.
I use ChangeLogs a lot. My preference for hand-made ChangeLogs is that
the author involuntarily tends to order things by priority. The fact
that he bumped the solib version is much more important than that he
cleaned up whitespace, fixed an include flag that breaks on some obscure
platform, etc. The latter of examples of the kind of entries frequently
seen in auto-generated logs. As Murray says, increased entropy. I'll
take a weak wine to a high-powered beer any day.
--Pat
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]