Re: [PATCH] Add --pretty=changelog

From: Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org>
Date: Mar 3, 2007, 14:12 UTC
Message-ID: <877ityquud.fsf@latte.josefsson.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0703021419520.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Simon Josefsson wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>> 
>> > I saw that in your mail already, and I find the style cvs2cl outputs 
>> > ugly.
>> 
>> Well, if you don't follow the GNU ChangeLog format, then please call it 
>> something else.  The format is well documented.
>
> Well, it is still ugly. I mean, really ugly. Like in "it's easier to 
> script, therefore I don't fix it" ugly.
>
> And yes, the format is well documented. For example, it includes the 
> function names in brackets, which both my patch and cvs2cl do not do. 
> These function names actually got me interested, and I would have tried to 
> generate them automatically, too.

Including the function names in brackets is optional, but the wrap style is inherent in the format.

However, it sounds like a nice idea to automatically add function names when there aren't too many of them. Possibly one should be able to use a regexp to restrict the set of function names (useful, e.g., for only having brackets for public API functions). I recall that "diff" has an option to print C function names in patches, maybe that could be used.

Show 16 quoted lines

>> > No charset problem. In Git commit messages, the first line is special. 
>> > It is the so called "oneline" description. If you wrap the oneline, 
>> > it's your fault, not Git's.
>> 
>> But I want more than the oneline comment in the ChangeLog?  There is no 
>> size limit on ChangeLog messages, and having as much information as 
>> possible available is better.
>
> With Git, it is encouraged that you write useful commit messages. There 
> are commits where the patch consists of just a line change, and the 
> message of a really long text. For a good example, look at commit 
> v1.4.0-rc1~50: the commit message has 49 lines of text, but the patch only 
> changes 5 lines.
>
> If you are serious about "having as much information", include the 
> _complete_ commit message.

Yes, I do want the complete commit message. While 49 lines of ChangeLog entry is a lot, it is not completely unheard of. Although the recommendation in the GNU ChangeLog specification to move such lengthy discussions to manuals or source code comments is often good.

>> Anyway, for now I'll be settling with the (just announced) git2cl since 
>> it gives me the most flexibility.
>
> In hindsight I agree with Junio that a script is better for this purpose.

Yup, I think it will be more flexible to keep it outside of git. It makes it easier to do some un-git-ish things (like handling those "empty" CVS log messages).

/Simon