On 11 Jan 2021 12:00, Simon Marchi wrote:
> On 2021-01-11 6:05 a.m., Andrew Burgess wrote:
> > I think sim/ should follow the same policy as gdb/ for now.  Do feel
> > free to raise this as a suggestion for gdb/ in general though, it
> > would be an interesting conversation to observe.
> 
> Last time I tried the gitlog-to-changelog script on GDB, it produced
> horrible results.  Probably because it was not designed for C++.
> 
> Making a script to produce ChangeLogs for C code is already very
> difficult, making it work with good results for C++ would be even
> worst.  And most importantly, I think it would be wasted development
> time.

to be clear, it isn't generating entries exactly like we write.  it's
using the git commit logs with formatted dates.  so i don't think this
applies exactly anymore.  so it's inline with the GNU's VCS principles:
https://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Change-Logs.html
(and that also recommends just using gitlog-to-changelog).

> My opinion is that we should either keep hand-written ChangeLogs, or
> admit that ChangeLogs are not useful and get rid of them altogether
> (and you know which side I lean towards).  But auto-generating
> ChangeLogs, other than allowing to check the "we have ChangeLog" box,
> doesn't produce anything useful.

i'm obviously a huge +1 for this ;)
-mike