From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nz2UL-00008F-Pb for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 06:42:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5E36AE0956; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 06:42:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from amun.cheops.ods.org (amun.cheops.ods.org [82.95.138.191]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6685E0818 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 2010 06:42:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tefnut.cheops.ods.org ([2001:888:1022:0:211:24ff:fe37:e46e] helo=gentoo.org) by amun.cheops.ods.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Nz2UB-0007Ge-En for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 08:42:08 +0200 Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 08:41:18 +0200 From: Fabian Groffen To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [git migration] The problem of ChangeLog generation Message-ID: <20100406064118.GW817@gentoo.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (Darwin 8.11.0, VIM - Vi IMproved 7.2) Organization: Gentoo Foundation, Inc. X-Content-Scanned: by amun.cheops.ods.org (Exim Exiscan) using SpamAssassin and ClamAV X-Archives-Salt: 5d4637ac-97da-4bc6-a825-3d658def5e09 X-Archives-Hash: 0ae87d93179adf4c71ad6cfb4e6268c7 On 06-04-2010 07:43:02 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > * It makes zero sense to manually manage ChangeLogs in git[1] > - Irritating conflicts while merging branches or remote master > + Similar argument for having only distfile manifests; but I digress... > - Duplication of effort and information > - Saves space for local checkouts This seems to assume a) that we will do branches, and b) that those branches somehow are official and in use In CVS we are not allowed to use branches, as a policy, that somehow makes sense. Our stable tree is visible via keywords instead. Why would we suddenly do branches? It still isn't a good thing. If you talk about branches in the sense of a clone of the entire repo, why would we suddenly do massive concurrent development on the same ebuilds? I can tell you from good experience that you only do such things if you really have to, e.g. when you are in an overlay that needs to have modifications to nearly everything and you try to keep that overlay up-to-date with its origin, gentoo-x86. It's no fun, because it conflicts pretty much on lots of things, not ChangeLogs. It seems to me, that if you are in a clone working on something, you just only write the ChangeLog once you merge it with its origin, gentoo-x86. You have to review what happened at that stage anyway. If you really have lots of changes, you will find that many commits on the other side will cause you conflicts, so the ChangeLog is just a very small part of it. Conclusion, if you can, try hard to keep your changes minimal, and preferably zero compared to the origin, gentoo-x86. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level