On 12/23/2011 03:38 PM, Jim Meyering wrote: > Stefano Lattarini wrote: >> Hello Gnulibers. >> >> Currently, the `gitlog-to-changelog' script clusters ChangeLog entries with >> the same date together, placing them under a single "date line" in the >> generated output. >> >> So we have something like this: >> >> >> $ ./build-aux/gitlog-to-changelog -- -n 2 76d222b >> >> 2011-12-22 Jim Meyering <meyer...@redhat.com> >> >> correct previous ChangeLog entry: s/set -x/set -e/ >> Spotted by Stefano Lattarini. >> >> init.sh: avoid unwarranted test failure when using "set -x" >> * tests/init.sh (compare): Ignore nonzero exit from >> compare_dev_null_. >> Otherwise, in a test script that uses "set -x" (like many in vc-dwim) >> a use like "compare exp out" would get evoke an unconditional >> failure. >> >> >> where I'd like to see something like this instead: >> >> $ ./build-aux/gitlog-to-changelog -- -n 2 76d222b >> >> 2011-12-22 Jim Meyering <meyer...@redhat.com> >> >> correct previous ChangeLog entry: s/set -x/set -e/ >> Spotted by Stefano Lattarini. >> >> 2011-12-22 Jim Meyering <meyer...@redhat.com> >> >> init.sh: avoid unwarranted test failure when using "set -x" >> * tests/init.sh (compare): Ignore nonzero exit from >> compare_dev_null_. >> Otherwise, in a test script that uses "set -x" (like many in vc-dwim) >> a use like "compare exp out" would get evoke an unconditional >> failure. >> >> This latter format would match the current practice used in the Automake >> hand-maintained ChangeLog. >> >> Would you consider adding an option to gitlog-to-changelog to support such a >> format? > > Why? Solely for consistency, after you've made the switch from > a manually-maintained to an automatically-generated ChangeLog file? > No, rather because, if you write git commit messages with multiple paragraphs in the commit body (as I often do, and intend to continue to), the latter format becomes essential.
> Do you consider the duplication of the identical-date-name lines useful? > Yes; see above. > The default format emitted by gitlog-to-changelog matches > what emacs' changelog-mode does. That seems consistent with > the "avoid duplication" philosophy and also tends to keep the > ChangeLog file more compact. > I hope the above argument will make you reconsider this position; if not, I can still try to implement the feature myself, and keep the patched script in the Automake repository -- so no big deal either way. Thanks, Stefano
