The use of the toplevel ChangeLog and config/ChangeLog

The use of the toplevel ChangeLog and config/ChangeLog

[Kelley Cook]

[Crossposted to the GCC, GDB, and Binutils mailing lists]

A recent checkin by Daniel Jacobowitz to the config directory called my 
attention to an apparent anomaly in the ChangeLogs for the config/ 
directory.

Some checkins to the config directory are accompanied by an addition to 
the config/ChangeLog:

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/config/ChangeLog?sortby=date&only_with_tag=MAIN

While other checkins are being documented in the toplevel ChangeLog with 
a config/xxxx: entry:

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/gcc/ChangeLog?sortby=date&only_with_tag=MAIN#rev1.795

Since this is confusing, I propose two alternatives:

a) There remains a separate config/ChangeLog and all the config/ changes 
be documented only in there.

b) All changes to the config/ directory be documented in the toplevel 
directory and there not be a config/ChangeLog.

Of course, it is quite possible, that am I missing something and there 
is a reason that some go in one ChangeLog and some in the other?

Anyway I'll volunteer to clean up the ChangeLog(s), if everyone can come 
to an agreement of which way it should go.  Personally, I would think 
that the ChangeLog in the toplevel should be good enough.

Kelley Cook

Re: The use of the toplevel ChangeLog and config/ChangeLog

[Zack Weinberg]

Kelley Cook <kcook34@ford.com> writes:

> a) There remains a separate config/ChangeLog and all the config/
> changes be documented only in there.
>
> b) All changes to the config/ directory be documented in the toplevel
> directory and there not be a config/ChangeLog.
>
> Of course, it is quite possible, that am I missing something and there
> is a reason that some go in one ChangeLog and some in the other?
>
> Anyway I'll volunteer to clean up the ChangeLog(s), if everyone can
> come to an agreement of which way it should go.  Personally, I would
> think that the ChangeLog in the toplevel should be good enough.

I vote (a), because there is legitimate reason for the top-level
ChangeLogs in src/ and gcc/ not to be identical, but the config/
directory is supposed to be kept precisely in sync between the two
repositories.  Therefore keeping a separate changelog for that
directory ensures that changes will stay documented in both
repositories.

zw

Re: The use of the toplevel ChangeLog and config/ChangeLog

[DJ Delorie]

> a) There remains a separate config/ChangeLog and all the config/ changes 
> be documented only in there.

This is the way it's supposed to be.

Re: The use of the toplevel ChangeLog and config/ChangeLog

[Nathanael Nerode]

>Kelley Cook <kcook34@ford.com> writes:
>> a) There remains a separate config/ChangeLog and all the config/
>> changes be documented only in there.
>>
>> b) All changes to the config/ directory be documented in the toplevel
>> directory and there not be a config/ChangeLog.
>>
>> Of course, it is quite possible, that am I missing something and there
>> is a reason that some go in one ChangeLog and some in the other?
>>
>> Anyway I'll volunteer to clean up the ChangeLog(s), if everyone can
>> come to an agreement of which way it should go.  Personally, I would
>> think that the ChangeLog in the toplevel should be good enough.

Zack Weinberg writes:
>I vote (a), because there is legitimate reason for the top-level
>ChangeLogs in src/ and gcc/ not to be identical, but the config/
>directory is supposed to be kept precisely in sync between the two
>repositories.  Therefore keeping a separate changelog for that
>directory ensures that changes will stay documented in both
>repositories.

(a) is correct.  :-)

-- 
Nathanael Nerode  <neroden at gcc.gnu.org>
http://home.twcny.rr.com/nerode/neroden/fdl.html