Re: Stop updating ChangeLog?

"Maciej W. Rozycki" <[email protected]> writes:

> 1. It is often cheaper in terms of computation or I/O to run `grep' on
>    local ChangeLog files than on output from `git', which in turn means
>    you get results sooner.  I know it's a weak argument, but still.
>

ChangeLog is a summary of 'git log', it is fast to do search in it, but
the benefit-cost ratio is quite low, IMO.  We have 1979 ChangeLog
entries in 2017, and we must spend some efforts to create these
entries.  Some of them have more than 40 lines, and all of them are not
useful, AFAICS. Most of these long entries just describe some mechanical
changes by "Likewise".

> 2. More importantly, many times I found writing a ChangeLog entry the last 
>    reflection point when I realised the solution wasn't actually the right 
>    one.  This is because at that point you need to give individual changes
>    another thought, and then actually look at them from a different angle, 
>    to have them properly expressed in ChangeLog-speak.  I expect that at 
>    least some people have had a similar experience and I'd like to keep 
>    that opportunity.

Yes, I had the similar experience too.  What we need here is to jump out
of the code/patch, and think about the big picture again.  I did that
by means of writing commit log, and it happens several times that I find
some flaws when I write commit log.  We can still describe the design
and change of patch in commit log, which is more valuable and less
mechanical than ChangeLog.

-- 
Yao (齐尧)