[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Changelogs, really useful?
From: |
Richard Riley |
Subject: |
Re: Changelogs, really useful? |
Date: |
Fri, 06 Aug 2010 19:45:18 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Deniz Dogan <deniz.a.m.dogan@gmail.com> writes:
> 2010/8/6 Andrea Crotti <andrea.crotti.0@gmail.com>:
>> It's not really a question about emacs maybe (even if we can automate
>> things) but more general about programming...
>>
>> I was wondering if it's still so useful to write detailed Changelogs.
>> I mean all the software is under revision control, and doing small
>> commits often I write a commit message for only one function, which
>> would be exactly what I add in the changelog.
>>
>> I don't like to write things twice, and also history in the control
>> revision system is much more detailed, does it really make sense to add
>> changelogs?
>>
>> I think that only the changes that involve the architecture or how to
>> use the software should be really important, but the default style on
>> emacs is quite detailed.
>>
>> How do you manage?
>> Write twice? Write only in the changelog/scm? Other?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>
> I suspect it's nice to have a changelog as a file just to be able to
> put it online or wherever people would find it useful. Not everyone
> enjoys or knows how to see the bzr log.
>
> Also, consider that the changelog file was introduced before bzr,
> which meant that without it people would have to look in a CVS log.
> (Those poor people!)
Generate the changelog from the VCS in use when you Make the program.