On Sat, Jan 11, 2014 at 2:18 PM, João Távora joaotavora@gmail.com wrote:
I don't agree at all: you *should* describe in the ChangeLog or commit messages **why you changed what**. In the NEWS file, you describe the user-visible aspects of your change.
We both agree that a change log should describe the "why". My point is that the GNU ChangeLog format encourages describing the "what" (see for example http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Style-of-Change-Logs.html#Style-of-Change-Logs) which made perfect sense back in the CVS days, not such much with a modern VCS. My second point is that energy wasted producing this kind of ChangeLog would be better pointed towards updating the NEWS file as well as proper commit messages.
That said, going through SLIME's ChangeLog I see plenty of useful explanations, so it might not be that much of an issue. I suppose going through each changed definition is a good review exercise.
There's some redundancy between the ChangeLog and Git log that needs to be addressed. I agree with Helmut that waiting to see what Emacs does seems reasonable.
Just my 2 cents,