Re: [E-devel] eet and updating ChangeLog: the moap tool

[Vincent T. <vt...@un...>]

On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:

>
>
> On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Andrew Williams wrote:
>
>> You can of course have both.
>> Generate a ChangeLog file from the subversion logs and have a subversion 
>> hook update this everytime a change is made...
>> Would that keep everyone happy?
>
> not really (for me). The svn log would pollute the ChangeLog file with 
> useless commits like a warning fix. Do that with eet (which is tiny...), and 
> you'll see what I mean.

examples from svn log in eet:

"endianess bugzors!"
"Bilious barnacles"
"fix the bitch"
"update"
"oops..."
"sssh"
"Silence"

etc...

if everyone would have done good ChangeLog entry from the beginning, why 
not, but it's not the case. I would be ashamed to propose a ChangeLog with 
such entries.

> Seriously, when an important commit must be noted in the ChangeLog (and it 
> should not happen a lot when the lib is released), it takes really no time 
> for the committer to use moap to update the ChangeLog file. I can't 
> understand why using a new tool is so disturbing for some people, and why 
> they are reluctant to use such new tool, especially when the commands are so 
> simple.

especially when some guys here don't hesitate to use big tools like 
valgrind, gdb, oprofile, write powerful shell scripts, use python and are 
very good programmers in general. Just 2 little lines are really a big 
challenge, it seems.

Vincent

> Also I'm for using the right tool for the right task. svn log is not the 
> right tool, imho.
>
> Vincent
>
>> On 30 Jan 2009, at 19:23, Vincent Torri wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I really dislike ChangeLog files, they predate any source control
>>>> version. Now CVS/SVN/Git/Whatever nicely replaces that. So generating
>>>> it automatically is the way to go.
>>> 
>>> of course I disagree. Mainly because of an experience i had with
>>> autotools: for the EFL, I had to check if I didn't use macros that were
>>> too recent, or on the contrary if they were old enough to replace them by
>>> newer ones. If I had to look at all the svn logs, i doubt that i would
>>> have finished that work today (there are a lot of macro / features in
>>> autoconf, automake and libtool).
>>> 
>>> On the contrary, I just opened the ChangeLog files, did a search in it,
>>> and it was quite fast for me to find the informations.
>>> 
>>> That's why I think that, if it helped me, a changeLog can help other
>>> people. Note that I agree with raster's position here: noting in a
>>> ChangeLog only the most important changes. For example, even if I had
>>> committed in eet repo (only formatting and autotools stuff, iirc), i
>>> didn't modified the ChangeLog (Well, actually, i added one entry, to
>>> mention that the compilation can be done with Visual Studio). So the
>>> ChangeLog does not grows too much and has only important cahnges in it.
>>> 
>>> That's my opinion as a user of a tool. And i think that there are a lot of
>>> users who don't know how to use cvs, svn or git and are quite happy to
>>> have some ChangeLog files.
>>> 
>>> Vincent
>>>
>>> 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by:
>>> SourcForge Community
>>> SourceForge wants to tell your story.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> enlightenment-devel mailing list
>>> enl...@li...
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Ce message a été vérifié par MailScanner
>> pour des virus ou des polluriels et rien de
>> suspect n'a été trouvé.
>> Message délivré par le serveur de messagerie de l'Université d'Evry.
>> 
> -- 
> Ce message a été vérifié par MailScanner
> pour des virus ou des polluriels et rien de
> suspect n'a été trouvé.
> Message délivré par le serveur de messagerie de l'Université d'Evry.
>
>