[Mono-dev] github workflow proposals

[Mark Probst]

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Miguel de Icaza <miguel at novell.com> wrote:
> As soon as someone writes the tool that generates the ChangeLog from the
> commit messages when producing a tarball, I am fine with dropping the
> ChangeLog-on-commit.

If nobody else does it I'm volunteering - I really, really want to get
rid of ChangeLogs :-)

The question is what kind of format we want:

Do we want to keep the per-file comments?

Let's say my commit touches metadata/sgen-gc.c and metadata/sgen-gc.h.
 Do we want

---
2010-07-28  Mark Probst <mark.probst at gmail.com>

  * sgen-gc.c, sgen-gc.h: Important change.
---

or are we happy with

---
2010-07-28  Mark Probst <mark.probst at gmail.com>

  * Important change.
---

If it's the former, the question is whether we want to have that
format in the commit message, as well.  If not, the script can only
generate a message with all touched files in one comment, i.e. we
won't be able to do

---
2010-07-28  Mark Probst <mark.probst at gmail.com>

  * sgen-gc.c: Important change.

  * sgen-gc.h: Other part of the important change.
---

I'd be perfectly happy with a commit message that doesn't mention the
files, letting the script put them into the ChangeLog message.

I.e. what I propose is making this commit message:

---
Important change.

This change was necessary because it's really, really important,
so I changed some files to make it happen.
---

into this ChangeLog entry:

---
2010-07-28  Mark Probst <mark.probst at gmail.com>

  * sgen-gc.c, sgen-gc.h: Important change.

    This change was necessary because it's really, really
    important, so I changed some files to make it happen.
---

Of course if the commit touches files in multiple directories, more
than one ChangeLog will get an entry with the (same) message (modulo
the filenames).

Comments?

Mark