On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 02:30, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>> No to trac reports as they ain't complete now. Dave and I talked about
>> that in Stuttgart, and we decided that quick bugs to fix won't have a
>> trac ticket. We'll only use trac's bugtracker to keep track of unfixed bugs.
>>
>> I would be much more in favor to drop the changelog and use "git log"
>> instead.
>>
>>> (Hint: I hate the changelog file because I keep forgetting to update
>>> it, and it sucks to handle it in the main repo due to how it
>>> integrates with branches)
>>>
>>
>> Can't agree more :)
>
> The CHANGELOG is supposed to be a list of "changes that are
> interesting to the user", ie. the changes that we include in release
> notices etc. Git log includes a ton of extra stuff, and would require
> significant manual filtering at release time to produce the change log
> data.
Yes, but it requires significant manual filtering *now* to produce it
as well. And it misses stuff (I *know* that I keep forgetting and
don't always pick up on it and fix it later, and I'm pretty sure
others do as well). So you'd have to make a pass through all the git
logs *anyway* if you want to keep it up to date.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
