> On Feb 3, 2018, at 2:29 AM, Jan Mulder <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 03-02-18 10:30, Lubomir I. Ivanov wrote: >> i draw my experience (i.e. "where i've seen this") from a certain >> closed source software for audio engineers with an open-sourced >> backend and a fairly large and technical user base, where the users >> demand details from the updates. >> these developers follow the "release-small-release-often" model and >> their change logs look like this: >> # Regions: ensure time signature remains consistent at start/end >> of moved regions [p=1918885] >> or: >> <Area>: <details about the change> [reference thread / issue] >> full log: https://forum.cockos.com/showpost.php?p=1919544&postcount=1 >> i find this changelog useful for both developers and the wider public. >> if the users have questions about a certain vague entry, they have the >> means to ask us. > > Ok, looked at this, and this changelog is basically seems the output of git > log. Useful for developers? No, they already have the tools for this. So > while useful, it does does not add anything *new* for developers. Useful for > users ... well I cannot speak for all users, but it would surprise me when > the average Subsurface is really interested in git log style output.
I don't think this level of details is useful for the typical user. >> one convenient feature of Github is that it allows us to push commits >> on top of user PR branches to possibly add a commit touching the >> changelog. > > So ... the maintainer merging patching up the missing changelog stuff ... > well ... that seems like babysitting to me. I would just review with: NAK, > changelog missing/wrong. It's a fine line. I don't want to make it too hard to contribute, but yes, in general requesting that the author adds a CHANGELOG entry seems fair. >>> In general: ok. But I come back to my earlier remark: for who do we write >>> the changelog? > > But what is missing in the discussion now, is an answer to this question. > This answer cannot be a simple: for all users and developers and the website > and Facebook announcements (as I do not believe that there is a unified list > that suits all at the same time). I want to be able to copy from the ReleaseNotes (which are the target for the CHANGELOG file, which exists to have fewer merge conflicts) to the announcement. So what I want to see in there are user visible changes. High level. So if I look at https://github.com/Subsurface-divelog/subsurface/pull/1091 I'd say that prior to applying the patch we had maybe too little detail. The PR skirts being more verbose than I like, but I think it stays just barely on the good side of things. My suggested changes would be basically nit-picking. E.g., combine line 21+22, maybe drop line 19... /D _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
