On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 09:01 -0500, Jonathon Jongsma wrote: > > Same thing with the dates. The old ChangeLog only had dates, not > time, > > so there is imho no loss in just using dates in the autogenerated > file. > > I agree with alex. The changelog should be easily readable. big > strings of +++++++------ > make it harder to scan. If we want that detailed level of > information, we can always > extract it from git on demand anyway.
If anybody eventually thinks they have a decent way to generate ChangeLogs then please do add it here so we can have some consistency: http://live.gnome.org/Git/ChangeLog I'm interested to see the result, though I'm frankly resigned to the entropy increase. I personally have never seen a generated ChangeLog that was anywhere near as useful as a separate ChangeLog, regardless of what other tools are available to do commits archeology, so my projects will not change that practice just because of a VCS change. No, I'm not interested in discussing it. -- Murray Cumming [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
