This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: ChangeLog entry complexity
- From: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>
- To: joseph at codesourcery dot com
- Cc: normalperson at yhbt dot net, carlos at redhat dot com, pasky at ucw dot cz, roland at hack dot frob dot com, neleai at seznam dot cz, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 12:24:44 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: ChangeLog entry complexity
- References: <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1303261741360 dot 8202 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20130327024859 dot GA25013 at dcvr dot yhbt dot net> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1303271427040 dot 23096 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 14:31:37 +0000
> A key point is *in one place* - it's easy to grep the ChangeLogs for
> references to a particular file name or function name.
This is bogus, we know for a fact that files and functions are left
out of certain changelog entries.
It has even been stated that this is exactly the thing to do, leave
files and function names out, for a tree wide ABI change ala "All
So what you're stating is really a non-argument.
In fact, this is an argument for getting rid of ChangeLog files
and using GIT repo searches instead, because unlike ChangeLog
entries the GIT repo has complete information.
> (I've no idea how to get git to show all changes to a file of a
> given name, anywhere in the source tree a file of that name may have
> appeared at any time in the past - or to files whose names matched a
> given pattern - or to functions anywhere in the source tree with a
> given name, or whose names matched a given pattern. The sysdeps
> structure of glibc makes those natural things to do. But supposing
> git does have a way to list such changes based on patterns in file
> or function names, the "in one place" issue still applies.)
The GIT repository is one place, and yes it can do all of the things
you describe and more.