On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 12:54:53AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > Having spent a bit more time with GCC sources (as opposed to wwwdocs) > recently and looking for prior art to guide me, I noticed there's a > lot of options to specific the ChangeLog file(s) to use. > > And correspondingly a lot of inconsistency. > > Right now we seem to allow for > > 1. gcc/cp/ChangeLog > 2. gcc/cp/ChangeLog: > 3. gcc/cp > 4. gcc/cp: > 5. gcc/cp/ > > and probably more. > > Can we streamline this a bit and converge on one of the forms 3-5? > > Personally I'd suggest 3 (the shortest) or 5 (the directory), but whatever > ... as long as things become more consistent, which is easier on newbies > and reading logs (or automatically processing them later on).
I have done 5 for many years. The colon isn't a great choice imo, the changelog messages themselves contain colons as well, and it is nice to have this visually distinct. "gcc/" looks a lot better than just "gcc" (and similar for other dirs, but less bad). (I often left it out completely if it would have been just gcc/, since it was just for humans, pretty much all of the changelog format is not machine-parseable without AI advances anyway, so heh). But 1 and 2 are much worse indeed :-) Unnecessary words distract from the actual content. Segher
