[gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

Hi,

Council decided to push back to ML the remaining bullet point about
ChangeLog generation[1]

"should we require that autogenerated changelogs have a way to edit
them afterwards to fix typos and such."

The Council decided to NOT focus on $VCS specific solutions so please
refrain from proposing solutions related to git and focus instead on a
realistic solution so we can finally deal with that. I will lead this
discussion until the next Council meeting to make sure we wont divert
again from the original target.

Previous discussion on this topic can be found here[2][3].

[1]http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20110913-summary.txt
[2]http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_0e85a042dcadce40a4e72b8f369d7875.xml
[3]http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-project/msg_3675d8a397ee2b5b3088df42e3352b6f.xml


- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=mivu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

["Paweł Hajdan, Jr."]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 742 bytes --]

On 9/16/11 7:08 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> Council decided to push back to ML the remaining bullet point about
> ChangeLog generation[1]
> 
> "should we require that autogenerated changelogs have a way to edit
> them afterwards to fix typos and such."

In my opinion we should do the simplest thing that works, because
bikeshedding on this is already taking too long.

There are many successful open source projects which do not have
explicit ChangeLog files and rely only on VCS logs. They're doing fine.

I agree that there may be benefits to handling the ChangeLogs in some
fancy way, but let's be practical and pragmatic. In my opinion it's a
minor issue, and benefits of git migration would be far greater.

Paweł


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 203 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/17/11 00:32, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 9/16/11 7:08 AM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> Council decided to push back to ML the remaining bullet point
>> about ChangeLog generation[1]
>> 
>> "should we require that autogenerated changelogs have a way to
>> edit them afterwards to fix typos and such."
> 
> In my opinion we should do the simplest thing that works, because 
> bikeshedding on this is already taking too long.
> 
> There are many successful open source projects which do not have 
> explicit ChangeLog files and rely only on VCS logs. They're doing
> fine.
> 
> I agree that there may be benefits to handling the ChangeLogs in
> some fancy way, but let's be practical and pragmatic. In my opinion
> it's a minor issue, and benefits of git migration would be far
> greater.
> 
> Paweł
> 
In my opinion, we do not need to care about typos etc. We are human
beings, so mistakes are part of our lives. Being able to fix
post-generated changelogs will increase the size of $VCS since
Changelogs need to be placed to $VCS for editing after generation and
having a smart deduplication algorithm on the server side to filter
duplicate messages. This is a bit stupid. If you make a mistake on
your commit message, that's fine. Be careful next time.

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=rN9F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Nirbheek Chauhan]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> In my opinion, we do not need to care about typos etc. We are human
> beings, so mistakes are part of our lives. Being able to fix
> post-generated changelogs will increase the size of $VCS since
> Changelogs need to be placed to $VCS for editing after generation and
> having a smart deduplication algorithm on the server side to filter
> duplicate messages. This is a bit stupid. If you make a mistake on
> your commit message, that's fine. Be careful next time.
>

I agree. Plus, if we use git-notes to *append* to ChangeLog entries
(in case you left out important information), we've covered all bases
as far as I'm concerned.

-- 
~Nirbheek Chauhan

Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Rich Freeman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 894 bytes --]

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org>wrote:

>
> I agree. Plus, if we use git-notes to *append* to ChangeLog entries
> (in case you left out important information), we've covered all bases
> as far as I'm concerned.
>
>
>
If something is REALLY critical that needs to be fixed you can always use a
hack like adding a line of whitespace or something and re-committing (which
will work with any scm), but I'd only reserve that for when a changelog
entry is so factually wrong that it risks a real problem.

However, I'd really question whether ChangeLogs are the place to store such
a critical piece of documentation in the first place.  If it is THAT
important that users know about a change it should be in news.

I agree that it seems like we're at the point where "just a little better"
is becoming the enemy of "already way better than what we have."

Rich

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1317 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2039 bytes --]

On 17-09-2011 10:01:47 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 5:07 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan <[1]nirbheek@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> 
> I agree. Plus, if we use git-notes to *append* to ChangeLog entries
> (in case you left out important information), we've covered all bases
> as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> If something is REALLY critical that needs to be fixed you can always use a
> hack like adding a line of whitespace or something and re-committing (which
> will work with any scm), but I'd only reserve that for when a changelog
> entry is so factually wrong that it risks a real problem.   
> 
> However, I'd really question whether ChangeLogs are the place to store such
> a critical piece of documentation in the first place.  If it is THAT
> important that users know about a change it should be in news.
> 
> I agree that it seems like we're at the point where "just a little better"
> is becoming the enemy of "already way better than what we have."

I would prefer going this route myself.  Generate all ChangeLogs from
commit messages only.  This is easy to implement (POC is running for
Prefix), but has a little issue with ChangeLog being in Manifest file.
I think we should just omit it, or (better) allow the Manifest to have
multiple signed parts, such that the ebuilds, dists and files are signed
by the committing developer, and the ChangeLog is signed by the
generation process (like snapshots are).

The council has, however, (like Markos' initial mail explained) decided
that ChangeLog entries must be updatable (e.g. corrected) afterwards.
That makes a (ChangeLog) file IMO necessary, and hence nothing can be
done different from making repoman update the ChangeLog itself upon
commit one way or another.  This isn't really new, it's bug #337853.

Note that the latter approach also solves any problems of entry order,
as are forseen when using a VCS like git.


[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=337853

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/19/11 16:26, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> I would prefer going this route myself.  Generate all ChangeLogs
> from commit messages only.  This is easy to implement (POC is
> running for Prefix), but has a little issue with ChangeLog being in
> Manifest file. I think we should just omit it, or (better) allow
> the Manifest to have multiple signed parts, such that the ebuilds,
> dists and files are signed by the committing developer, and the
> ChangeLog is signed by the generation process (like snapshots
> are).
If you generate Changelogs from commit messages then you dont need to
place the to $VCS unless you want to edit them ( see below )
> 
> The council has, however, (like Markos' initial mail explained)
> decided that ChangeLog entries must be updatable (e.g. corrected)
> afterwards.
Really? when? There is no decision on this topic yet[1](3rd bullet
point). If I am wrong, please point me to the correct source. I
thought this discussion is about whether we want to edit them
afterwards or not. So unless we decide to edit them, we don't need
ChangeLog files

[1]http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20110809-summary.txt

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOd0dTAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LC7wgP/RCQG3dFHYLv3EIsnEakiw+x
i0wbXROOsQYhd1MHPw6LEu7sKHIoTOvHuk2JpWp2VzUHrusuzTtMhGgxBc1gS7oj
5Q/npe8rBYZOBwrSgVLpAKFOaNhM6UrHVDmGudC+y5c4AjlwSZzLFBaCSJT1ihBb
Q0M24Pipng6/ppPUUa3rZHR4GPY0+6gC9gNixn40M1/WxtxchqSc2k4FCvWh5+Nr
UC4LUGKTZR+Ik/ndJQ+cVX24xYBOOXVrXsKfVKNtiOUW+AXeewHCBuGrSh2UnLdD
hWXwvF0imCVsHGzbpAV2eS0cu7sIx+uNj0Y+ajFQZbmP0LINhRwxlecxzu//I0ww
ha9gZpwcrC4S8F2sP1Er1uZQfBZazLK+0TzqKXYm0hqmamEXR0C99YZOZHn+mu8h
NGTdIWc8siv9Di0SA/FechYBYNi30c8ttQ740lkp9Wqg3jqm7yfihxASqLqXZK5l
JjLFuJteLzrDqXA6yO8LhLiwd9C8LIpHr1qsVHTimLDGqHlZGUxo9KgcLqbxQQAJ
hYvPo3IReLRKWZrea2vZKZI8453GzucgOjV9OGjF2NcOm1AL10cVIRmyPb5KEhqo
Ati1gjWprGmPsVrvYqEl3FlC8sE25dqjEvoSQFlTM4UqflQRTmxroNHSZu1cv1FY
rH2rsRRuqug8NPCA32Ou
=YDM2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1854 bytes --]

On 19-09-2011 16:44:51 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 09/19/11 16:26, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > I would prefer going this route myself.  Generate all ChangeLogs
> > from commit messages only.  This is easy to implement (POC is
> > running for Prefix), but has a little issue with ChangeLog being in
> > Manifest file. I think we should just omit it, or (better) allow
> > the Manifest to have multiple signed parts, such that the ebuilds,
> > dists and files are signed by the committing developer, and the
> > ChangeLog is signed by the generation process (like snapshots
> > are).
> If you generate Changelogs from commit messages then you dont need to
> place the to $VCS unless you want to edit them ( see below )

I can't parse/don't understand this sentence.  Could you
explain/elaborate?

> > The council has, however, (like Markos' initial mail explained)
> > decided that ChangeLog entries must be updatable (e.g. corrected)
> > afterwards.
> Really? when? There is no decision on this topic yet[1](3rd bullet
> point). If I am wrong, please point me to the correct source. I
> thought this discussion is about whether we want to edit them
> afterwards or not. So unless we decide to edit them, we don't need
> ChangeLog files

Sorry, I recalled the details wrong.  The effect is the same though, a
file needs to exist:

[quote from [1]]
   - Vote: Retroactively change existing entries, yes or no.
     - We will append to changelogs and retain all existing changelog 
       messages.
[/quote from [1]]

An additional advantage of keeping the file is that we can easily fix
all entries that people wrote/committed ugly and helpless messages for,
like "^" and so on.


> [1]http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20110809-summary.txt


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/19/11 17:27, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 19-09-2011 16:44:51 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 09/19/11 16:26, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>>> I would prefer going this route myself.  Generate all
>>> ChangeLogs from commit messages only.  This is easy to
>>> implement (POC is running for Prefix), but has a little issue
>>> with ChangeLog being in Manifest file. I think we should just
>>> omit it, or (better) allow the Manifest to have multiple signed
>>> parts, such that the ebuilds, dists and files are signed by the
>>> committing developer, and the ChangeLog is signed by the
>>> generation process (like snapshots are).
>> If you generate Changelogs from commit messages then you dont
>> need to place the to $VCS unless you want to edit them ( see
>> below )
> 
> I can't parse/don't understand this sentence.  Could you 
> explain/elaborate?
Yeah it is obvious that I can't type. What I meant was that if we use
the commit logs to generate the ChangeLogs then we can do that on
server side (just before populating the portage tree to rsync
mirrors). In this case we do not need to store the Changelog files on
$VCS.
> 
>>> The council has, however, (like Markos' initial mail
>>> explained) decided that ChangeLog entries must be updatable
>>> (e.g. corrected) afterwards.
>> Really? when? There is no decision on this topic yet[1](3rd
>> bullet point). If I am wrong, please point me to the correct
>> source. I thought this discussion is about whether we want to
>> edit them afterwards or not. So unless we decide to edit them, we
>> don't need ChangeLog files
> 
> Sorry, I recalled the details wrong.  The effect is the same
> though, a file needs to exist:
> 
> [quote from [1]] - Vote: Retroactively change existing entries, yes
> or no. - We will append to changelogs and retain all existing
> changelog messages. [/quote from [1]]
> 

Yes a file is needed but like I said before, this file can be
generated on a post-commit server just before populating portage to
rsync servers

> An additional advantage of keeping the file is that we can easily
> fix all entries that people wrote/committed ugly and helpless
> messages for, like "^" and so on.
> 
In this case you need smart filtering tools to avoid duplicate
messages ( one from $commit_message and the one you wrote yourself to
fix that message ). However, this will be the case if we decide to
allow edits on ChangeLogs.

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=08+b
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2649 bytes --]

On 19-09-2011 19:28:28 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 09/19/11 17:27, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 19-09-2011 16:44:51 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> >> On 09/19/11 16:26, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> >>> I would prefer going this route myself.  Generate all
> >>> ChangeLogs from commit messages only.  This is easy to
> >>> implement (POC is running for Prefix), but has a little issue
> >>> with ChangeLog being in Manifest file. I think we should just
> >>> omit it, or (better) allow the Manifest to have multiple signed
> >>> parts, such that the ebuilds, dists and files are signed by the
> >>> committing developer, and the ChangeLog is signed by the
> >>> generation process (like snapshots are).
> >> If you generate Changelogs from commit messages then you dont
> >> need to place the to $VCS unless you want to edit them ( see
> >> below )
> > 
> > I can't parse/don't understand this sentence.  Could you 
> > explain/elaborate?
> Yeah it is obvious that I can't type. What I meant was that if we use
> the commit logs to generate the ChangeLogs then we can do that on
> server side (just before populating the portage tree to rsync
> mirrors). In this case we do not need to store the Changelog files on
> $VCS.

Yeah, so what's your point?

> > Sorry, I recalled the details wrong.  The effect is the same
> > though, a file needs to exist:
> > 
> > [quote from [1]] - Vote: Retroactively change existing entries, yes
> > or no. - We will append to changelogs and retain all existing
> > changelog messages. [/quote from [1]]
> > 
> 
> Yes a file is needed but like I said before, this file can be
> generated on a post-commit server just before populating portage to
> rsync servers

What's the advantage of that?  We just end up with a different location
for the information that's now in a file called ChangeLog.  People want
to be able to edit that stuff (yeah, no vote yet, but the tendency
seemed going that way) so why not keep it local to the ebuild?

> > An additional advantage of keeping the file is that we can easily
> > fix all entries that people wrote/committed ugly and helpless
> > messages for, like "^" and so on.
> > 
> In this case you need smart filtering tools to avoid duplicate
> messages ( one from $commit_message and the one you wrote yourself to
> fix that message ). However, this will be the case if we decide to
> allow edits on ChangeLogs.

Ehm.  Are we talking about the same thing here?  ChangeLog commits don't
end up in ChangeLogs, do they?  Unless you run echangelog for it, of
course.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/19/11 19:51, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> 
>> Yes a file is needed but like I said before, this file can be 
>> generated on a post-commit server just before populating portage
>> to rsync servers
> 
> What's the advantage of that?  We just end up with a different
> location for the information that's now in a file called ChangeLog.
> People want to be able to edit that stuff (yeah, no vote yet, but
> the tendency seemed going that way) so why not keep it local to the
> ebuild?
Well it seems to me that most people want the simplest solution which
is "if the changelog is wrong so be it"
> 
>>> An additional advantage of keeping the file is that we can
>>> easily fix all entries that people wrote/committed ugly and
>>> helpless messages for, like "^" and so on.
>>> 
>> In this case you need smart filtering tools to avoid duplicate 
>> messages ( one from $commit_message and the one you wrote
>> yourself to fix that message ). However, this will be the case if
>> we decide to allow edits on ChangeLogs.
> 
> Ehm.  Are we talking about the same thing here?  ChangeLog commits
> don't end up in ChangeLogs, do they?
What is a "Changelog commit"? How is that different from echangelog
"Fix previous changelog entry" + repoman commit -m "Changelog Fixed".
Could you please explain me the changelog edit mechanism you have in mind?

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJOd3TMAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCNaoP+wUE5u5wxey16ZJ92iNKPFVh
fNeuLJx2KlRRBnEw4iWLg4K0radgK+QqTJnp3FKqqyLdkDBtzjmMO52+aUeTb8LU
hwPkwi9UnshbWRNl3sOdrXH/bL+jCFuqxFCaM9pOhzQT5WwzjDkNVVry9VZKAjOM
I125/sHha4asZzl6AxcvTMtd3pn4eUNYySs2Qg5QLQZBNR6EougbDz5U386uPAYW
S8an8gPDABEg3BfiAxGKBz4vssNuFSOmwtmDAZP0O5QAzfV9exm9YAERQYmPpLt2
mUYRpxDRqEd3Swzk0RgRXu0Hc/yzqJDD7Zv05OnVq6KKkxRAF9SnMY2888jNObhn
0FLSFs61b1DfkSUdOBqTvJyCPdNe/y1JZ/tIdJjUUAnokXtL8uGxoruyHG+dxPuE
OcCuS1Z3NmLdyGl2X/fI8BhXdH2HRRPHdUypddxjtBeBMYolLVX5gYdkoLK6yeBK
BeokfJF8bGNE4j89/+nLtldlU0AEza6c35v+tlGou4kLXBDwnLYmvlJkGfzNxb75
eLp5qbAL564M1W4rtZ3RWCZVhzWdXMMONO0qHc5d+/umLVdJy6We1DGOF/fuYaPg
ETNspIE1unCFMthD8Iz464iNw8N4Dh2Rq3mv6Ammwe1L9uKbA2pUxIT7fDJAi0bV
GwQwEYxeW82hKhH0WcHu
=uB0y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1309 bytes --]

On 19-09-2011 19:58:52 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > What's the advantage of that?  We just end up with a different
> > location for the information that's now in a file called ChangeLog.
> > People want to be able to edit that stuff (yeah, no vote yet, but
> > the tendency seemed going that way) so why not keep it local to the
> > ebuild?
> Well it seems to me that most people want the simplest solution which
> is "if the changelog is wrong so be it"

That includes me, but that doesn't get us further. :)

> >> In this case you need smart filtering tools to avoid duplicate 
> >> messages ( one from $commit_message and the one you wrote
> >> yourself to fix that message ). However, this will be the case if
> >> we decide to allow edits on ChangeLogs.
> > 
> > Ehm.  Are we talking about the same thing here?  ChangeLog commits
> > don't end up in ChangeLogs, do they?
> What is a "Changelog commit"? How is that different from echangelog
> "Fix previous changelog entry" + repoman commit -m "Changelog Fixed".
> Could you please explain me the changelog edit mechanism you have in mind?

$EDITOR ChangeLog && repoman commit -m "added bugref"

(side-note: I don't see the point of your echangelog usage for this case)


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/19/11 20:09, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> 
> $EDITOR ChangeLog && repoman commit -m "added bugref"
> 
> (side-note: I don't see the point of your echangelog usage for this
> case)
> 
> 
Ok pretty much what I said in my previous email. In this case you edit
the ChangeLog but the "added bugref" text will be appended to
Changelog instead of fixing your previous commit message. In my
opinion we have two options here

1) Ignore commit messages that only affect ChangeLogs. This requires
the ChangeLog entry to be kept on $VCS cause it is easier

OR
2) Remove the head -1 ChangeLog entry and insert the new one.

In both cases, the ChangeLogs need to be on $VCS


The only advantage for having the post-commit server generating the
ChangeLogs is the reduce $VCS size. I can't see any other advantages
whatsoever

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=Sw7T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1878 bytes --]

On 19-09-2011 20:21:51 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> On 09/19/11 20:09, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > 
> > $EDITOR ChangeLog && repoman commit -m "added bugref"
> > 
> > (side-note: I don't see the point of your echangelog usage for this
> > case)
> > 
> > 
> Ok pretty much what I said in my previous email. In this case you edit
> the ChangeLog but the "added bugref" text will be appended to
> Changelog instead of fixing your previous commit message. In my
> opinion we have two options here

Why?  The message will not go to ChangeLog, simply because repoman would
not do that, because echangelog doesn't do that as well:

[nut:portage/mail-client/mutt] % cvs update
cvs update: Updating .
cvs update: Updating files
[nut:portage/mail-client/mutt] % echangelog "bla"
**
** NOTE: No non-trivial changed files found.  Normally echangelog
** should be run after all affected files have been added and/or
** modified.  Did you forget to cvs add?
**
** In strict mode, exiting
** If you know what you're doing there pass '--no-strict' to echangelog

> 1) Ignore commit messages that only affect ChangeLogs. This requires
> the ChangeLog entry to be kept on $VCS cause it is easier

we already do that

> OR
> 2) Remove the head -1 ChangeLog entry and insert the new one.

complex for no reason

> In both cases, the ChangeLogs need to be on $VCS

or put differently, it's the best we can do when it is decided that we
need to be able to do things that require a file (like currently already
is the case).

> The only advantage for having the post-commit server generating the
> ChangeLogs is the reduce $VCS size. I can't see any other advantages
> whatsoever

I think this is non-sense, and only complicates matters.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 774 bytes --]

On 16:27 Mon 19 Sep     , Fabian Groffen wrote:
> [quote from [1]]
>    - Vote: Retroactively change existing entries, yes or no.
>      - We will append to changelogs and retain all existing changelog 
>        messages.
> [/quote from [1]]
> 
> An additional advantage of keeping the file is that we can easily fix 
> all entries that people wrote/committed ugly and helpless messages 
> for, like "^" and so on.

After autogenerated ChangeLogs have existed for long enough that hardly 
anyone will need to see handwritten messages anymore (since they'll be 
old and stale, I fully intend to switch my vote to supporting complete 
autogen.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Council Member / Sr. Developer
Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 917 bytes --]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:39:52 -0500
Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 16:27 Mon 19 Sep     , Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > [quote from [1]]
> >    - Vote: Retroactively change existing entries, yes or no.
> >      - We will append to changelogs and retain all existing
> > changelog messages.
> > [/quote from [1]]
> > 
> > An additional advantage of keeping the file is that we can easily
> > fix all entries that people wrote/committed ugly and helpless
> > messages for, like "^" and so on.
> 
> After autogenerated ChangeLogs have existed for long enough that
> hardly anyone will need to see handwritten messages anymore (since
> they'll be old and stale, I fully intend to switch my vote to
> supporting complete autogen.

To see that, devs should be motivated not to intentionally write cruft
into commit messages and/or edit ChangeLogs.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 731 bytes --]

On 19-09-2011 23:46:48 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2011 16:39:52 -0500
> Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > After autogenerated ChangeLogs have existed for long enough that
> > hardly anyone will need to see handwritten messages anymore (since
> > they'll be old and stale, I fully intend to switch my vote to
> > supporting complete autogen.
> 
> To see that, devs should be motivated not to intentionally write cruft
> into commit messages and/or edit ChangeLogs.

Also, if you don't force this situation (autogenerate ChangeLogs), you
never get to the point where "hardly anyone will need to see handwritten
messages anymore".


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1360 bytes --]

On 16-09-2011 17:08:01 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> Council decided to push back to ML the remaining bullet point about
> ChangeLog generation[1]

I propose that the council reconsiders their answers to all of the
questions, in particular the most important one "do we want ChangeLogs
to be auto-generated".

I propose instead that the council votes on NOT auto-generating
ChangeLogs, but instead asks the Portage team to implement updating the
ChangeLog file as part of repoman commit when there are files modified
(includes removal) excluding the ChangeLog file itself.

This solves most problems raised by council members, as well as others on
the various threads on this topic.
- The file can be edited (council intentional vote)
- All existing information is retained (council vote)
- Repoman updates ChangeLog so no filtering voodoo (council vote)
- Works with AnyVCS and branches*
- Needs no changes regarding Manifests, since ChangeLog is just in
  AnyVCS, known to repoman during commit


* assuming the merger either uses plain commit before finally merging
  the changes to the final tree (and committing with repoman commit
  ther), or the merger simply resolves the conflict by discarding
  changelog changes and performing final repoman commit with a full message

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Mr. Aaron W. Swenson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1973 bytes --]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 07:37:26PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 16-09-2011 17:08:01 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
> > Council decided to push back to ML the remaining bullet point about
> > ChangeLog generation[1]
> 
> I propose that the council reconsiders their answers to all of the
> questions, in particular the most important one "do we want ChangeLogs
> to be auto-generated".
> 
> I propose instead that the council votes on NOT auto-generating
> ChangeLogs, but instead asks the Portage team to implement updating the
> ChangeLog file as part of repoman commit when there are files modified
> (includes removal) excluding the ChangeLog file itself.
> 
> This solves most problems raised by council members, as well as others on
> the various threads on this topic.
> - The file can be edited (council intentional vote)
> - All existing information is retained (council vote)
> - Repoman updates ChangeLog so no filtering voodoo (council vote)
> - Works with AnyVCS and branches*
> - Needs no changes regarding Manifests, since ChangeLog is just in
>   AnyVCS, known to repoman during commit
> 
> 
> * assuming the merger either uses plain commit before finally merging
>   the changes to the final tree (and committing with repoman commit
>   ther), or the merger simply resolves the conflict by discarding
>   changelog changes and performing final repoman commit with a full message
> 
> -- 
> Fabian Groffen
> Gentoo on a different level

This seems to be the most reasonable suggestion so far. It would still allow
for corrections to be made to the ChangeLogs, if such corrections really are
necessary.

The only stumbling block would be a way to allow for atomic commits that won't
include a list of every package touched for the commit. But, I'm sure this is
minor. Then again, maybe I'm bringing up something that is neither here nor
there.

-- 
Mr. Aaron W. Swenson
Pseudonym: TitanOfOld
Gentoo Developer

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 230 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] ChangeLog generation: Edit generated Changelogs

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 09/28/11 18:37, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 16-09-2011 17:08:01 +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> Council decided to push back to ML the remaining bullet point
>> about ChangeLog generation[1]
> 
> I propose instead that the council votes on NOT auto-generating 
> ChangeLogs, but instead asks the Portage team to implement updating
> the ChangeLog file as part of repoman commit when there are files
> modified (includes removal) excluding the ChangeLog file itself.
> 
We voted on autogeneration but not on how to implement it. This
heavily depends on whether we want to edit changelogs or not. And
since the majority seems to want to edit changelogs then the right
thing to do it o generate them client side etc etc

> This solves most problems raised by council members, as well as
> others on the various threads on this topic. - The file can be
> edited (council intentional vote) - All existing information is
> retained (council vote) - Repoman updates ChangeLog so no filtering
> voodoo (council vote) - Works with AnyVCS and branches* - Needs no
> changes regarding Manifests, since ChangeLog is just in AnyVCS,
> known to repoman during commit
> 
Yeah Agreed

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=JcdD
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----