Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Request to add options to tools/git_changelog

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Request to add options to tools/git_changelog
Date: 2012-04-26 05:26:16
Message-ID: 23973.1335417976@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 05:09:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> --details-after Show branch and author info after the commit description

>> I don't understand the point of that.

> The release notes have the author at the end of the text.

So?  The committer is very often not the author, so I'm not seeing that
this helps much.  Not to mention that the commit message is almost never
directly usable as release note text, anyway.

>>> --oldest-first  Show oldest commits first

>> This also seems rather useless in comparison to how much it complicates
>> the code.  We don't sort release note entries by commit date, so what's
>> it matter?

> It is very hard to read the commit messages newest-first because they
> are often cummulative, and the order of items of equal weight is
> oldest-first in the release notes.

I'm unpersuaded here, too, not least because I have never heard this
"oldest first" policy before, and it's certainly never been followed
in any set of release notes I wrote.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Heikki LinnakangasDate: 2012-04-26 06:37:02
Subject: Re: Temporary tables under hot standby
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2012-04-26 05:01:47
Subject: Re: Request to add options to tools/git_changelog

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group