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 1QogG7-0005bf-0i for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 18:33:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 86FEF21C21F; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 18:33:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from amun.cheops.ods.org (amun.cheops.ods.org [83.161.135.166]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5327121C0A8 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2011 18:33:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tefnut.cheops.ods.org ([2001:980:57a5:1:211:24ff:fe37:e46e] helo=gentoo.org) by amun.cheops.ods.org with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1QogFp-0007yu-18 for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2011 20:33:17 +0200 Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 20:33:04 +0200 From: Fabian Groffen To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog generation - pros and cons (council discussion request) Message-ID: <20110803183304.GP20656@gentoo.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <20110602091338.GL14065@gentoo.org> <20110801201623.GX20656@gentoo.org> <20110803174310.GB2924@comet.ucsd.edu> <20110803175650.GN20656@gentoo.org> <20110803180907.GC2924@comet.ucsd.edu> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110803180907.GC2924@comet.ucsd.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (Darwin 8.11.0, VIM - Vi IMproved 7.3) Organization: Gentoo Foundation, Inc. X-Content-Scanned: by amun.cheops.ods.org (Exim Exiscan) using SpamAssassin and ClamAV X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 9281cc1afa58bbc11e9f0006f412af28 On 03-08-2011 11:09:07 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > > > 1. Include all commits, don't retroactively change existing ChangeLog > > > messages > > > > > > 2. Allow commit filtering, don't retroactively change existing ChangeLog > > > messages > > > > > > - Filters to allow: keywording, stabilization, removal of ebuilds. > > > Whoever implements the code can decide on the format of said filters. > > > > > > > > > Do any council members feel strongly that we should include additional > > > options, or is it good enough to just make a choice on these two? > > > > I listed the questions I think are relevant at the bottom of my mail. I > > feel you forgot the most important one: should ChangeLogs be > > auto-generated at all?. Only if yes, > > Yeah, that's already on my draft agenda [1]. =) But we should still have > a small set of options to choose from if we do vote to automate, so we > don't sit around for another month or discuss it aimlessly for hours. > Being prepared is what I'm hoping we can do here. Ok, then I suggest simply adding ", don't bother about changes between CVS log and ChangeLog" to both of your options. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level