Subject: Re: bug#12946: 23.2; log-edit-insert-changelog not inserting a description line from ChangeLog file

From: [email-masked] (Alfred M. Szmidt)
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 13:53:37 -0500

Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:

   >    2012-11-16  Alfred M. Szmidt  <[email-masked]>
   >
   > 	This is a deccription line.
   >
   > 	* random-file: New file.

   If you don't use a blank line between the two, you get

   This is a description line.
   * random-file: New file.

   in the log buffer, which seems fine to me. You can easily kill all
   but the first line if you don't want it.

   http://www.gnu.org/prep/standards/html_node/Style-of-Change-Logs.html#Style-of-Change-Logs

   says not to put blank lines between related entries (essentially,
   IMO).  (Maybe it should be updated for the practise of adding a
   leading summary.)

Interesting; this might make me change how I do things.  I've always
done one ChangeLog entry per related entry.  Though, I think it would
be useful if there was some variable at least, that would only put in
the description line.

   >   * random-file: New file.
   >
   > What would be useful is that you got the description line
   > inserted instead, with nothing following it.  This is common
   > practise when working with various distributed version control
   > systems where the commit entry only contains a brief description
   > of the change, and the ChangeLog contains the detailed
   > information.

   Really? I got the impression the trend was to generate ChangeLogs
   from commit logs.

Well, there are two camps, those who keep ChangeLog entries in commit
message, and those who don't.  Those who don't put a short summary in
the commit message.  At least from my limited observations.  E.g. in
Emacs it tends to be short summaries in the commit message.