Robert Haas wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes: > >> I would like to apply the attached patch to git_changelog for use in > >> creating the major release notes. ?I specifically added these flags: > > > >> ? ? --author-after ?Show author after the commit > >> ? ? --master-only ? Show commits made exclusively to the master branch > >> ? ? --reverse-order Show commits in reverse date order > > > > Your implementation of --master-only seems really grotty. ?Can't you > > just add "origin/master" to the basic git log command? > > No, he wants to exclude things that were back-patched. But I agree > it's kind of grotty. Imagine you are preparing release notes for a > minor release. Now you will want all the back-branch commits, but not > the ones that were only committed to master. I think rather than > inserting piecemeal hacks like this, we should try to be a bit more > generic, something like -x branchname to exclude any commit that > touches the named branch, and -o branchname to restrict the output to > commits that touch ONLY the named branch, or something along those > lines.
Sure, that works for me. We can always improve what I have done. > > As for --reverse-order, what's that got to do with preparing release > > notes? ?The end product shouldn't be particularly sensitive to the order > > of commit of features ... > > True... > > And I can't say I like --author-only much, either. I understand its > use for preparing release notes, but I don't really like the idea of > adding something to the tool that solves 1% of the problem of > automating release note generation. I'm afraid that in a few major > releases the documented method of preparing release notes will look > like this: > > src/tools/git_changelong --master-only --author-after --reverse-order > --omit-commit-ids --omit-dates --another-switch-bruce-invented > --more-magic --additional-sorcery --fix-other-things > --some-more-tweaks --etc-etc-etc > > At which point we will have successfully automated roughly 8% of the > work of release note generation and reduced the source code to utter > unmaintainability. Well, I need it for the release notes now, so either I make my own version, tieing release note generation even closer to me, or we add some flags and keep improving the tool. Bottom line: I need to start the release notes today --- I can hack my own version and we can revisit this later, which I am afraid will be in one year, or we can just add what I have and we can keep hacking on it as needed. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
