On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 02:05:23PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > I agree adding rarely-used options to a tool doesn't make sense, but the
> > question is what percentage of the git_changelog userbase am I?
>
> 50% I think. The only thing that's really concerning me here is that
> the reverse-sort option seems likely to be bug-inducing, and I really
> don't grasp that it has real value. But whatever.
Well, newest first would show this:
add feature D to feature ABCadd feature C to feature ABadd feature B to feature Aadd feature A
More logical (oldest-first) is:
add feature Aadd feature B to feature Aadd feature C to feature ABadd feature D to feature ABC
Also consider that A is usually the big, clear commit message, and B,C,D
are just minor adjustments with more brief commits, which might require
adjusting the release note item for feature A. When they are in
newest-first order, that is much harder.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
