ChangeLog change to .ChangeLog

Joel Sherrill joel.sherrill at
Tue Mar 5 20:47:10 UTC 2013

On 3/5/2013 2:41 PM, Chris Johns wrote:
> Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 02/28/2013 01:30 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
>>> I think the git log is superior to manual ChangeLog entries, and we
>>> can produce
>>> higher level changes/news reports separately. Probably there is some
>>> way to
>>> either dump the log or selected entries when making a tar or offline
>>> distribution. This is something we can consider.
>> Yes, the ChangeLog files are an anachronism.
> I suggest we remove them. Git's log command with '--grep' provides the
> same thing as 'grep * ChangeLog'.
> If you take a look at ...
> This directory has a text file which is the output of the script and the
> script. The left column of the text file is the line number in the
> ChangeLog so you can check the entry against git manually. The script
> checks each entry in all ChangeLog files against git's log command with
> grep and 2063 entries out of 14707 did not match. I manually checked a
> few entries and it seems a range of reasons exist for the differences.
> For example a single ChangeLog entry is 2 commits, or take this one ...
> 5045: 2010-04-29 Sebastian Huber <sebastian.huber at>
> The ChangeLog has "PR 1507" and the commit has "PR1507". I suspect most
> of the failed matches will be due to these types of reasons.
I am perfectly fine with removing them all.

They represent duplicate information and provide no value. In fact, at 
this point,
they are dangerously out of date. That is deceptive.

> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> rtems-devel mailing list
> rtems-devel at

Joel Sherrill, Ph.D.             Director of Research & Development
joel.sherrill at        On-Line Applications Research
Ask me about RTEMS: a free RTOS  Huntsville AL 35805
Support Available                (256) 722-9985

More information about the devel mailing list